Maybe a custom function would be better — then you could generate markdown for https://github.blog/2022-05-09-supercharging-github-actions-with-job-summaries/ that provided clickable links that took you directly to the problem.

Markdown report could just be third option in print.lints

We currently produce check annotations, and support error_on_lint to exit if a lint is found.
Maybe we can default error_on_lint to in_ci()?

@hadley PTAL at this repo's current GHA set-up. We recently updated lint-changed-files so that the action fails if new lints are detected. That's working pretty well for us:

Please help to close if you agree that's a good approach

Yeah, that looks like a good pattern. Do you plan to wrap that up a bit more into a reusable function?

do you have in mind an exported lint_repo() function? or an argument to lint_package()/lint_dir()

my first instinct was just better documentation (esp. if our workflow is added as a template in r-lib/actions)

The advantage of making it a function is that once it gets baked into r-lib/actions it's easier for you to change the behaviour if you discover there's a better approach.