本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

creating-prompts

Creates GitHub Copilot prompt files (`.prompt.md`) for VS Code. Use when building reusable workflow starters that route work to the right agent, collect the right inputs, and ship with install-ready templates, examples, and validation guidance.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testersスター 118(GitHub 118 + cccskills 0)
連携ツールGitHub

実行スコア 未検証

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(4)

  • SKILL.md4.8 KB
  • resources/prompt-quality-checklist.md1.2 KB
  • resources/prompt.example.prompt.md1.4 KB
  • resources/prompt.template.prompt.md979 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Creating Copilot Prompt Files

Use this skill when a task deserves a reusable entrypoint instead of the user re-explaining the same workflow every time. It helps create prompt files that are specific, easy to invoke, and well-matched to the agent or workflow behind them.

When to Use

Use this skill when the user asks for things like:

  • "create a prompt file for this workflow"
  • "turn this repeated request into a .prompt.md"
  • "route this task to the right agent with guided input"
  • "fix a prompt that is too vague or too generic"
  • "add a reusable prompt example for the team"

Typical scenarios:

  • creating a focused slash-command entrypoint
  • standardizing a frequent analysis or generation workflow
  • capturing required inputs and outputs for a specialized task
  • improving prompt usability for a repository or public collection

Outcome Standard

A strong prompt contribution usually includes:

  • a single clear job
  • the right target agent and model when appropriate
  • explicit inputs, workflow steps, and output expectations
  • minimal overlap with agent identity or repository instructions
  • one install-ready prompt file plus reference material

Prompt Design Rules

  • Workflow starter, not persona - let the agent define behavior; let the prompt define the task.
  • One job per prompt - split prompts that try to launch multiple unrelated workflows.
  • Be explicit about inputs - state what the user or workspace must provide.
  • Define the finish line - describe the expected deliverable or completion state.
  • Stay reusable - avoid baking in one-off context that belongs in the user's actual message.

Workflow

Phase 0: Decide whether a prompt is the right primitive

Use a prompt when users need a reusable task starter. If the real need is a standing expert role, create an agent. If the real need is reusable procedural knowledge, create a skill. If the real need is always-on repository rules, create instructions.

Phase 1: Frame the prompt contract

Clarify or infer:

  • what task the prompt should trigger
  • which agent should receive the work
  • what input the user must provide
  • what output or artifact the prompt should produce

Phase 2: Draft the frontmatter

Choose the smallest useful set of fields:

  • name for a readable menu label when needed
  • agent to route the workflow intentionally
  • description to make the prompt discoverable
  • model when a model choice materially matters
  • argument-hint when the user needs help providing the right context
  • tools only when the prompt truly needs to override defaults

Phase 3: Write the prompt body

Use the supporting resources below while drafting:

  • ./resources/prompt.template.prompt.md
  • ./resources/prompt.example.prompt.md

A good prompt body should usually include:

  • a short goal statement
  • required or optional inputs
  • a numbered workflow
  • output expectations or completion criteria
  • constraints when the workflow should stay within tight bounds

Phase 4: Package the reference bundle

At minimum, provide:

  • the main .prompt.md file
  • one template or example for reuse
  • a short explanation of why the agent, model, and inputs were chosen

Phase 5: Validate before handoff

Check the result against ./resources/prompt-quality-checklist.md.

Pay special attention to:

  • whether the prompt tells the agent what to do without redefining who the agent is
  • whether the inputs are explicit enough to prevent weak output
  • whether the workflow is focused on one coherent outcome
  • whether the file is discoverable from the description and name

Common Failure Modes

  • writing a prompt that sounds like an agent manifesto
  • omitting the key inputs the workflow depends on
  • stacking multiple unrelated jobs into one prompt
  • overriding tools without a concrete need
  • producing a prompt that still requires the user to re-explain everything every time

Resource Map

  • ./resources/prompt.template.prompt.md - scaffold for a focused prompt file
  • ./resources/prompt.example.prompt.md - worked example of a reusable prompt
  • ./resources/prompt-quality-checklist.md - final review checklist before shipping

Definition of Done

A task using this skill is complete when:

  • the prompt starts one clear workflow
  • the chosen agent and inputs make sense for the outcome
  • the file is install-ready and internally consistent
  • supporting template or example material exists for reuse
  • the final prompt passes the quality checklist without obvious ambiguity

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

コメント

ログインなしで書き込めます。使ってみた感想、質問、動かなかった環境などを気軽にどうぞ。

まだコメントはありません。最初のコメントを書いてみませんか。

送信するとすぐに公開されます。メールアドレスや電話番号などの個人情報は書かないでください。URL は 2 つまでです。

0 / 1000 文字

このフォームは reCAPTCHA で保護されており、Google のプライバシーポリシーと利用規約が適用されます。

同じリポジトリのスキル

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026年8月27日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026年8月27日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026年8月27日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026年8月27日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026年8月27日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers1182026年8月27日 更新

jaktestowac のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する