본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

creating-custom-agents

Creates GitHub Copilot custom agents (`.agent.md`) for VS Code. Use when defining a specialized agent role, selecting a minimal toolset, referencing supporting skills, or shipping install-ready agent examples with clear boundaries and collaboration rules.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers스타 118(GitHub 118 + cccskills 0)
연동 도구GitHub

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(4)

  • SKILL.md4.9 KB
  • resources/custom-agent-quality-checklist.md1.3 KB
  • resources/custom-agent.example.agent.md1.6 KB
  • resources/custom-agent.template.agent.md1.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Creating Custom Agents

Use this skill when a reusable role needs its own identity instead of hiding inside a prompt or a skill. It helps create custom agents that are focused, tool-aware, and easy to extend without scope creep.

When to Use

Use this skill when the user asks for things like:

  • "create a custom agent for this workflow"
  • "design an agent with limited tools"
  • "turn this expert role into a .agent.md file"
  • "define how an orchestrator should delegate to specialists"
  • "fix an agent that is too broad or too verbose"

Typical scenarios:

  • creating a new single-purpose agent
  • building a specialist for a multi-agent workflow
  • tightening an existing agent's scope and tool access
  • preparing a reusable example agent for a shared repository

Outcome Standard

A strong custom agent contribution usually includes:

  • a crisp role and mission
  • a deliberate toolset rather than blanket access
  • clear guidance on when the agent should be used
  • boundaries that stop the agent from absorbing work better handled by prompts, skills, or instructions
  • an install-ready .agent.md file plus reference material

Agent Design Rules

  • Role first - define who the agent is and what it owns before writing any workflow guidance.
  • Minimal tools - only grant the tools the role genuinely needs.
  • Skills for procedure - reference skills for reusable workflows instead of stuffing the entire playbook into the agent.
  • Prompts for entrypoints - if users need a guided starting command, create a prompt file in addition to the agent.
  • Boundaries matter - explain what the agent should not do, especially when nearby agents overlap.

Workflow

Phase 0: Decide whether an agent is the right primitive

Choose an agent only when the work needs a persistent role, a specific tool profile, or a distinct collaboration pattern. If the need is only a reusable task starter, prefer a prompt. If the need is procedural knowledge, prefer a skill.

Phase 1: Study adjacent artifacts

Before drafting:

  • inspect similar agents, prompts, and skills already in the repository
  • identify the smallest role boundary that still feels useful
  • note what the agent should own directly versus delegate or reference

Phase 2: Define the agent contract

Clarify or infer:

  • the agent's mission
  • the main user requests it should handle
  • the tools it must have and the ones it should avoid
  • the output style or deliverables it should consistently produce
  • any collaboration or orchestration behavior

Phase 3: Draft the .agent.md file

Use the supporting files below while drafting:

  • ./resources/custom-agent.template.agent.md
  • ./resources/custom-agent.example.agent.md

A good first draft should cover:

  • frontmatter for name, description, model, and tools
  • a role section describing what the agent is responsible for
  • a short workflow or operating rhythm
  • constraints or anti-patterns
  • output expectations

Phase 4: Add the reference bundle

At minimum, provide:

  • the main .agent.md file
  • one example or template for reuse
  • a summary of why the chosen toolset and boundaries make sense

If the agent is part of a larger workflow, mention the prompts or skills it should work with.

Phase 5: Validate before handoff

Check the result against ./resources/custom-agent-quality-checklist.md.

Pay special attention to:

  • whether the description clearly signals when the agent should be used
  • whether the tools are minimal and intentional
  • whether the agent body defines identity and behavior instead of duplicating a skill
  • whether the output style is specific enough to be useful

Common Failure Modes

  • giving the agent a vague job like "help with everything"
  • granting too many tools out of convenience
  • embedding detailed workflow instructions that belong in a skill
  • copying repository instructions into the agent file
  • creating a new agent when a prompt or skill would have been enough

Resource Map

  • ./resources/custom-agent.template.agent.md - scaffold for a focused custom agent
  • ./resources/custom-agent.example.agent.md - worked example of a bounded specialist agent
  • ./resources/custom-agent-quality-checklist.md - final review checklist before shipping

Definition of Done

A task using this skill is complete when:

  • the role and scope are easy to explain in one short paragraph
  • the toolset matches the actual responsibilities
  • the file is install-ready and internally consistent
  • supporting template or example material exists for reuse
  • the agent passes the quality checklist without obvious overlap or confusion

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Defines, computes, and interprets test and quality metrics: pass rate, flake rate, suite duration, defect escape rate, time to detect, and coverage with its caveats. Use when building a QA dashboard, reporting suite health to stakeholders, comparing releases over time, or when a coverage percentage or a bug count is being treated as a measure of quality.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026년 8월 27일 업데이트

Analyzes diffs, changed files, hotfixes, and release candidates to identify where regression risk spreads and what must be retested first. Use when scoping retest after a change, reviewing QA impact for a pull request, or building a minimal confidence suite for release validation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026년 8월 27일 업데이트

Writes and reviews API automation tests with Playwright Test, covering setup/teardown, assertions, data management, and hybrid API+UI flows. Use when creating backend API tests, contract checks, data-driven API coverage, API+UI hybrid workflows, or reviewing existing Playwright API suites.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026년 8월 27일 업데이트

Measures the risk that code shipped without anyone understanding it: a teach-back attestation on high-risk changes, a risk band from changed-code complexity, diff size and whether a human explanation accompanied it, and optional AI-authorship provenance. Findings stay advisory by design. Use when an AI-assisted codebase grows faster than the team reads it, when reviews are rubber-stamped, when nobody can explain a module that ships weekly, or when leadership asks how much of the code the team can actually maintain.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026년 8월 27일 업데이트

Produces an evidence-backed go/no-go recommendation: exit criteria status, open-defect risk profile, coverage against risk, environment parity, rollback readiness, and the residual risk stated plainly. Use when preparing a release sign-off, when someone asks whether a build is ready to ship, or when a decision to release is being made on impressions rather than evidence.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026년 8월 27일 업데이트

Records human verification - code review, exploratory sessions, UAT, accessibility passes, UX and observability reviews - as dated, attributed attestations in a register, so human-centric practices stay in the quality contract without pretending to be automated checks. Use when a strategy requires verification no tool can prove, when sign-off evidence is scattered across chats and tickets, when a gap matrix needs to distinguish "attested" from "passed", or when an audit asks who verified what and when.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026년 8월 27일 업데이트

jaktestowac의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고