Agent Persona Exploration - 2026-04-25 #28390
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
This discussion has been marked as outdated by Agent Persona Explorer. A newer discussion is available at Discussion #28538. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Persona Overview
create-agentic-workflow.mdguide (GitHub Copilot Chat agent not directly invocable from workflow context)Personas & Scenarios
pull_requestschedule every 6hpull_requestschedule weeklyKey Findings
copilotengine preferred (102/201) butclaudeis favored for complex investigation tasks (aw-failure-investigator, api-consumption-report)[default]toolset is the most common (43 uses) — agent tends toward breadth over minimal permissionsTop Patterns
github: toolsets: [default]+bash: ["*"]for power workflows; scoped toolsets (repos, issues) for simpler onessafe-outputsused consistently;sandbox: agent: awfadopted in ~17 workflows for network firewall enforcementcreate-issue(61 uses),create-pull-request(40),add-comment(39),create-discussion(21)View High Quality Responses (Top 2)
DevOps - Deployment Failure Monitoring (4.8/5)
aw-failure-investigatorworkflow usesevery 6hschedule,claudeengine,agentic-workflowsMCP tool,create-issuewithgroup: trueand labels — ideal for incident tracking with deduplication.bash: ["*"]granted because log analysis requires broad access; compensated withactions: readonly permissions.PM - Weekly Feature Digest (4.6/5)
weekly-issue-summaryandapi-consumption-reportshow strong scheduled digest patterns with chart generation.edit:tool + bash for data processing,create-discussionfor output (correct — digests are informational, not task-tracking).View Areas for Improvement (Top 2)
QA Test Coverage Analysis (3.8/5)
breaking-change-checkerpattern (daily schedule → PR trigger), but guidance on how to extract coverage data from CI artifacts is missing.actions: readpermission +toolsets: [actions]combination needed for artifact access isn't well-documented for PR workflows.Tool Scope Inconsistency
toolsets: [all](3 instances) when narrower scopes would suffice — signals the agent may over-provision tool access when uncertain about requirements.create-agentic-workflow.mdon minimal toolset selection.Recommendations
Add a test coverage analysis shared import in
.github/aw/imports/— acoverage-analysis-base.mdtemplate covering how to access CI artifacts and comment on PRs would fill the QA persona gap.Strengthen toolset selection guidance in
.github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md— add a decision table: when to use[default]vs[repos]vs[issues]vs[all], with examples tying toolset choice to task type.Document engine selection heuristics in
.github/aw/github-agentic-workflows.md— clarify when to preferclaudeovercopilot(e.g., multi-step investigation requiring long context and reasoning → claude; fast PR comments → copilot).References: §24921767031
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions