BC agent-customization
**WORKFLOW SKILL** — Create, update, review, fix, or debug VS Code agent customization files (.instructions.md, .prompt.md, .agent.md, SKILL.md, copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md). USE FOR: saving coding preferences; troubleshooting why instructions/skills/agents are ignored or not invoked; configuring applyTo patterns; defining tool restrictions; creating custom agent modes or specialized workflows; packaging domain knowledge; fixing YAML frontmatter syntax. DO NOT USE FOR: general coding questions (use default agent); runtime debugging or error diagnosis; MCP server configuration (use MCP docs directly); VS Code extension development. INVOKES: file system tools (read/write customization files), ask-questions tool (interview user for requirements), subagents for codebase exploration. FOR SINGLE OPERATIONS: For quick YAML frontmatter fixes or creating a single file from a known pattern, edit the file directly — no skill needed.
Skill for managing VS Code agent configs: instructions, prompts, applyTo patterns, tool restrictions. Promises to help when instructions are ignored or don't trigger.
Seven files in the folder, YAML syntax checked—no errors. Quality score 85/100, process score 50. No critical findings, safety at 100. Skill honestly limits itself: skips general coding questions, ignores runtime errors and MCP servers. Supports all major platforms.
The catch: no actual model runs—only static analysis. Unclear how well it catches real config problems or if it just reads files back. Install if you frequently debug VS Code instructions and don't mind testing it yourself.
WORKFLOW SKILL — Create, update, review, fix, or debug VS Code agent customization files (.instructions.md, .prompt.md, .agent.md, SKILL.md…
As a process C 50/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
How to improve
- 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: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 50/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 85Steps. 8 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1150 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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
- +3Description length 942: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 8 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (6 of 6)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.