BD agent-host-e2e-tests
Use when writing, recording, updating, validating, or troubleshooting Agent Host end-to-end and real-provider integration tests under src/vs/platform/agentHost/test/node/e2e and providerIntegration. Covers adding a cross-provider test, re-recording fixtures after an SDK bump, required cross-platform Azure validation, gating non-deterministic or platform-specific tests, and diagnosing replay cache misses.
This skill teaches an AI to write and debug e2e tests for Agent Host in VS Code—handling fixtures, cross-platform Azure validation, and replay cache issues. Promises coverage of cross-provider tests and fixture re-recording after SDK bumps.
One file, 2518 tokens, no critical errors, but broken references signal the folder wasn't verified in place. Quality score of 78 flags documentation gaps. No model run or sandbox testing. The skill works across all major platforms, yet without real model validation it's unclear how well it'll guide an agent through VS Code's test code.
Install if you're writing e2e tests for Agent Host specifically and can verify output manually. Good for one-off tasks; production pipelines need real-run validation first.
Use when writing, recording, updating, validating, or troubleshooting Agent Host end-to-end and real-provider integration tests under…
As a process D 44/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: ../ci-artifact-testing/SKILL.md
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../ci-artifact-testing/SKILL.md - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 80): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 44/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: ../ci-artifact-testing/SKILL.md
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 39 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2518 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 407: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 39 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 78.