Thank you for your interest in contributing to our community! We currently only accept discussions created through the GitHub UI using our provided discussion templates. Please re-submit your discussion by navigating to the appropriate category and using the template provided.

This discussion has been closed because it was not submitted through the expected format. If you believe this was a mistake, please reach out to the maintainers.

Try gh workflow disable 386397444 and then delete its runs through the REST API, which has cleared ghost workflows for others. In Buddy each pipeline is its own object defined in YAML, so removing one via the UI, bdy CLI or REST API actually removes it.

Adding to @jarek-dylewski's direction with two corrections specific to your forensics:

1. gh workflow disable 386397444 will 404. Your own evidence shows why: the object is state: deleted and absent from GET /actions/workflows — the disable endpoint can no longer address it. That's precisely what makes it "orphaned": no API surface reaches it, so no amount of run-deletion retires the object itself. Recreating a file at path BuildFailed isn't possible either — it isn't even a valid workflow path (not under .github/workflows/), which marks this object as corrupted rather than merely deleted.

2. The discriminator you haven't read yet: the annotation text on one of the failed runs. startup_failure with zero jobs always carries a one-line reason in the annotations bar of the run page (or GET /repos/{o}/{r}/check-runs/{id}/annotations if any check-run exists). The text routes the whole case:

• "…payments have failed or your spending limit needs to be increased" → org billing block (jobs rejected before start; nothing wrong with your workflows — and it would explain why even the clean infrastructure.yml dispatch creates zero jobs)
• "…action is not allowed…" → your allowed_actions=selected policy with sha_pinning_required=true rejecting something at startup
• a parse/permission string → workflow-file side

The ghost object intercepting check-suite attribution since 2026-10-16 remains the primary suspect for the misattribution either way, but the annotation decides whether the zero-jobs symptom is billing, policy, or the ghost — paste its exact wording and the case routes itself. (For any individual stuck run records along the way: the two-week rule lets you DELETE them; it doesn't touch the workflow object.)