extension-user-contract-review
Skill573 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
**WORKFLOW SKILL** - Inspect every first-party azd extension PR diff for user contract changes before general code review. USE FOR: review extension PR, check extension contract changes, request experiences spec, review extension flags or schemas, audit contract review coverage. DO NOT USE FOR: core-only PRs, implementing extensions, running tests, or protobuf generation outside PR review.
In this repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- cli/azd/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.agents/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.connections/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.inspector/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.projects/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.routines/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.skills/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- cli/azd/extensions/azure.ai.toolboxes/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- ext/vscode/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .github/skills/extension-user-contract-review/evals/fixtures/cli/azd/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- ext/vscode/.github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- azdSkill
- agentic-workflowsSkill
- azd-code-reviewerSkill
- azd-grpc-contractsSkill
- azd-preflightSkill
- changelog-generationSkill
- foundry-extension-scenario-authoringSkill
- foundry-extension-scenario-pr-regressionSkill
- foundry-extension-scenario-suite-runSkill
- senseiSkill
- tool-version-upgradeSkill
- weekly-demo-videoSkill
- weekly-reportSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 18
Read and apply the review procedure in full.
- Distinctive: line 29
Do not treat a "refactor" label, tests, documentation, or a spec link in another thread as an exemption for those structural additions or …
- Very specific: line 35
If evidence, a required skill, an anchor, or output capacity is missing, report blocked and the specific limitation.
- Distinctive: line 36
Never silently skip the pass, fabricate a missing spec, or claim a clean review.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Extension user contract review
REVIEW SKILL - Invoked by the PR reviewer; use read-only repository and GitHub tools.
Inspect every changed file under cli/azd/extensions/** before general review lenses, including fork PRs.
This is a mandatory review pass, not an optional lens selected after spotting a contract change.
Procedure
Read and apply the review procedure in full. Use the complete diff and review history to:
- Account for every changed extension file in an internal coverage ledger.
- Identify only new or removed commands, positional parameters, flags, and YAML schema components.
- Match existing threads and approved experiences spec links per finding.
- Return one diff-line inline finding per distinct new contract change, preserving
sideandline:RIGHTuses new-file coordinates; deletion-onlyLEFTuses old-file coordinates. - Audit coverage and actual outgoing comments after triage; return
complete,blocked, ornot-applicablewith file, new-comment, and existing-thread counts.
The host posts comments and exposes the completion status. Do not execute PR code or mutate GitHub. Do not treat a "refactor" label, tests, documentation, or a spec link in another thread as an exemption for those structural additions or removals. Preserve findings through ordinary noise filters and comment limits.
Error handling
If evidence, a required skill, an anchor, or output capacity is missing, report blocked and the specific limitation.
Never silently skip the pass, fabricate a missing spec, or claim a clean review.
Examples
A tested new flag still needs a spec thread. A changed default, validation rule, prompt, or output shape does not. An unchanged finding already reported needs no duplicate. A genuine internal refactor produces no contract comment after inspection.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

