Tell dashboard LLM that CI failure alone isn't author/external

PRs can still be reviewed and approved while CI is failing, so CI failure on its own should not shift the bucket. Treat the boolean only as weak supporting evidence; the conversation drives the decision.

Author: trask

.github/scripts/pull-request-dashboard.py

@@ -51,8 +51,11 @@
 Decide who needs to act next on this PR using ONLY the context below. \
 Merge-conflict status is shown in a separate deterministic column of the \
 dashboard — do not infer it. CI is summarized as a single boolean \
-(failing yes/no); pending checks are treated as not-failing. Focus on \
-the conversation (comments, reviews, commits).
+(failing yes/no); pending checks are treated as not-failing. CI failure \
+on its own is NOT a reason to assign the PR to the author or to external: \
+PRs can still be reviewed and approved while CI is failing. Treat CI \
+status only as weak supporting evidence and focus on the conversation \
+(comments, reviews, commits).
 
 Guidelines:
   - If the latest substantive activity is from the AUTHOR and there is an \
@@ -62,7 +65,8 @@
   - Use "external" ONLY when the conversation explicitly indicates the PR \
 is blocked on something outside this repo (e.g., an upstream PR, a \
 spec change, a release in another project). A new PR with no reviews \
-yet is NOT external — it is waiting on an approver.
+yet is NOT external — it is waiting on an approver. CI failing alone \
+is NOT external.
 
 Respond with a single JSON object and nothing else (no prose, no fences):
 {{"side": "approver" | "author" | "external"}}