* Emit human-readable domain label on review findings
Add an optional findings[].domain field to the DO review output contract so
each finding carries its own human-readable review-domain display label. Leaf
review skills set it on every finding they emit; the al-code-review super-skill
copies it verbatim during rollup and sets it to "Agent" for its own
cross-cutting agent findings. This decouples consumers from BCQuality's domain
taxonomy: they render finding.domain verbatim instead of maintaining a
sub-skill-id -> label map.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Define domain display-label constraints
Clarify that review domains may contain internal whitespace, punctuation, case-sensitive text, and non-ASCII characters. Require consumers to preserve and safely encode the complete label instead of relying on lossy slugs, matching the replacement BC-ALAgents consumer.
Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot-Session: 77d0a40e-8bf5-40ac-a450-40eb0255db03
---------
Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Move eight net-new rules into the Microsoft layer, remove six overlapping articles, and update review skill discovery and references.
Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot-Session: 0b130227-d418-4bc0-9e7d-ec6a37adf039
Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
Repair broken knowledge references and align review examples with canonical articles. Correct explicit version gates, restore a missing title, and recognize the plugin directory in the root guard.
Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Make domain-skill knowledge discovery index-aware
The 6 AL domain review skills and read.md now enumerate candidate articles
from the BCQuality knowledge index (knowledge-index.json) instead of opening
every file under the domain folder to read its frontmatter. The worklist
selection predicate is unchanged (keywords intersect diff tokens, or topic
matches a changed object type) - only the discovery source changes, so the
same articles are selected. Full article bodies are read only for worklisted
entries.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Reconcile §Source wording with the lean knowledge index
The BCQuality filter now emits a lean index whose per-article description is a
one-line hint rather than the full verbatim Description. Update the six domain
skills' §Source to say the index carries a one-line description hint (keywords,
title, and a one-line description) instead of the full description. The
worklist selection predicate is unchanged: keywords drive selection and the
agent opens worklisted articles in full for their rule bodies.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Own the knowledge-index generator in BCQuality
The knowledge index is an acceleration of the skills' Source step, and its
schema is part of that contract — so BCQuality should own the generator rather
than each consumer re-implementing it. Add tools/Build-KnowledgeIndex.ps1 (the
parser + lean-description shaping + emit, lifted verbatim from the
BCAppsBCQuality filter prototype) and document the index in agent-consumption.md.
Consumers prune their clone to policy, then call this script; the index stays
in lockstep with the Source contract and every orchestrator gets the same
faithful index for free. The worklist selection predicate is unchanged.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Own knowledge-index generation in BCQuality (runtime + CI), not the consumer
The index is now produced by BCQuality itself: Entry's preparation step
rebuilds knowledge-index.json over the live, already-pruned clone at the start
of every run, and a new CI workflow validates the generator's health
(determinism, full coverage, selection-input integrity). Consumers no longer
invoke or know about the index.
Rebuilding over the pruned clone (vs shipping a committed full-corpus index)
keeps the index exact for any consumer policy: it can never list a denied
article, so policy-excluded rules cannot leak into discovery. READ now states
the index is discovery-only -- a finding must cite an article opened in full,
and rows whose file is absent are discarded before ranking.
- skills/entry.md: new 'Preparation -- knowledge index' precondition
- skills/read.md: index ownership + discovery-only invariant
- microsoft/skills/review/*.md (6): 'BCQuality builds' (not 'the filter emits')
- agent-consumption.md 5a: runtime+CI ownership rationale
- .github/workflows/knowledge-index.yml + scripts/Test-KnowledgeIndex.ps1: generator guard
- .gitignore: never commit the runtime index
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Make runtime index build non-interactive and self-contained
entry.md now gives the exact build command (pwsh ./tools/Build-KnowledgeIndex.ps1)
so the agent's preparation step is unambiguous, and the generator's -BCQualityRoot
parameter is optional (defaults to the clone root) so it runs in non-interactive
-p mode without prompting.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Resolve knowledge-index root to absolute path (cross-platform fix)
Get-ChildItem.FullName is always absolute, so deriving the relative article
path via Substring(\.Length) requires an absolute root. A relative root
such as '.' (used by the CI guard's 'Test-KnowledgeIndex.ps1 -Root .') left the
full path almost intact on Linux, producing bogus 'home/runner/.../knowledge'
paths and failing the coverage check. Normalise both the generator's
-BCQualityRoot and the test's -Root with Resolve-Path before use.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
Agent findings (model-judgment findings not backed by a curated knowledge
file) were producing too many false positives. Raise their emission bar and
make them advisory:
- skills/do.md: add a canonical 'Precision bar' for agent findings (emit only
concrete, material defects an expert would agree on; steelman first; an
explicit never-emit list; 'when in doubt, omit') and cap agent-finding
severity at minor (advisory, non-gating), with a promotion note for
severe-but-uncovered concerns.
- al-code-review.md: decouple the mandatory self-review reasoning from output
so emitting zero agent findings is a valid outcome; add the severity cap.
- Six leaf review skills: add the per-domain precision bar and severity cap
(style leaf gets domain-appropriate wording).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
BCQ now wins on coverage in the synthetic complex benchmark, but only
2 of 25 rendered comments carried GitHub suggestion blocks while the
AIRHack reviewer emitted suggestions for every finding. Tighten the
DO contract and leaf-skill instructions so suggested-code is no longer
a soft affordance for mechanical fixes.
Changes:
- Add optional findings[].suggested-code-omission-reason to the DO
schema.
- Document suggested-code as expected for small, local, mechanical
findings, with examples (delete unreachable code, Count() > 0 ->
not IsEmpty(), move local Label, add missing ToolTip/OptionCaption,
replace string-concatenated Error, change permission token, add an
obvious else/guard branch).
- Require omission reasons when a mechanical-looking finding omits
suggested-code.
- Update all AL leaf skills and al-code-review guidance with the same
stronger contract.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
The original DO contract pinned all agent reasoning to the super-skill:
'Agent findings are emitted only by super-skills... Leaf sub-skills MUST
NOT emit agent findings'. This funnels all agent reasoning across all 6
domains through a single super-skill pass, which is the root structural
cause of the attention dilution we have been chasing in BCAppsBCQuality
PRs #28 and #30:
- T1 standalone run showed al-security-review finds rimd-on-read-only
cleanly when run alone, but emits zero agent findings because the
contract forbids it. So obvious things like case-without-else (no
matching KB article yet) get dropped on the floor.
- The al-code-review self-review pass keeps producing 0-1 agent findings
per PR because it is asked to reason across 6 domains in one pass.
The fix is to move agent reasoning into the leaves, bounded by each
leaf's domain. Each leaf now has both knowledge-backed and agent-finding
permissions within its own scope; the super-skill self-review pass
becomes a smaller, cross-cutting role.
skills/do.md
- Replace the 'only by super-skills' / 'MUST NOT' clause with a
two-tier model: leaf sub-skills MAY emit agent findings strictly
within their declared domain; super-skills MAY emit agent findings
for cross-cutting concerns that span domains.
- Update the encoding rules: leaf agent findings have references:[]
and an agent:-prefixed id, no from-sub-skill (the leaf's own report
carries the finding under its own skill.id). Super-skills set
from-sub-skill='agent' for their own self-review findings; when
rolling up leaf agent findings, they set from-sub-skill=<leaf-id>.
- Clarify that 'MUST validate against knowledge' applies to super-
skill self-review candidates only - leaves already validated within
their domain when they decided to emit.
microsoft/skills/review/al-{security,performance,privacy,style,upgrade,
ui}-review.md
- New paragraph after the confidence rules instructing each leaf to
surface domain-specific agent findings when no knowledge file
covers a defect the agent recognises from general AL knowledge.
- Bound the scope: 'The scope is strictly <domain>; defects outside
this domain belong to other leaves and MUST NOT be emitted here.'
- Same validation requirement: check the worklist for a matching
knowledge file first; if one exists, upgrade to a knowledge-backed
finding instead.
microsoft/skills/review/al-code-review.md
- Rewrite the 'Agent self-review pass' subsection. The pass is now
explicitly for cross-cutting concerns that no single leaf could
have surfaced because they span multiple domains. Domain-specific
reasoning belongs in the leaves, not duplicated here.
- Update the rollup behavior to acknowledge leaf-emitted agent
findings: they are rolled up like any other sub-skill finding, with
from-sub-skill set to the leaf id, and are not re-validated by the
super-skill (the leaf already validated within its own domain).
- Drop the 'Leaf sub-skills MUST NOT emit agent findings' line.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Driven by a parity comparison between BCAppsBCQuality PR #27 and
BCAppsCampAIRHack PR #162 on byte-identical content:
| | BCQuality | AIRHack |
|--|--|--|
| Total findings | 6 | 10 |
| Performance | 0 | 4 |
| Security | 0 | 5 |
Standalone runs of al-security-review and al-performance-review against
the SAME diff produced the expected matches (rimd-on-read-only via
inherent-permissions-minimal-grant; redundant-Get via
avoid-redundant-get-when-record-already-loaded). The miss in the live
run is therefore not a knowledge-coverage gap and not a worklist
filtering issue. It is attention dilution inside the al-code-review
super-skill, which the model collapses into one rolled-up generation
pass on real-size PRs.
Changes:
microsoft/skills/review/al-code-review.md
- New 'Execution discipline (mandatory)' subsection in the Action step
that explicitly forbids collapsing leaves into one shared reasoning
pass and requires each sub-skill to walk its Source -> Relevance ->
Worklist -> Action steps as its own iteration before the next leaf
starts.
- Self-review pass is now described as the final, mandatory iteration
with a concrete candidate-category checklist (architecture-level
smells, error-handling gaps, magic constants, privacy/telemetry,
resource lifecycle). Returning zero agent findings on a real-size
diff is explicitly defined as a defect.
microsoft/skills/review/al-{security,performance,privacy,style,
upgrade,ui}-review.md
- Each leaf skill now states that when an unambiguous .good.al
companion exists, findings[].suggested-code should carry the
literal replacement for the source lines. Closes the
one-click-suggestion gap created when BCQ#19 only updated
al-code-review.
microsoft/knowledge/security/case-must-handle-unknown-enum-values.{md,
bad.al,
good.al}
- New article: case over a security-sensitive enum (Authentication
Type, Authorization Mode, Identity Provider, Permission Scope,
Encryption Algorithm) MUST have an else arm. Without it, an unknown
enum value silently falls through and the security context never
initialises. The bad sample is lifted from the SharePoint Graph
helper that triggered the parity finding.
microsoft/knowledge/performance/instream-length-unreliable-for-bc-
streams.{md,bad,good}
- New article: InStream.Length returns 0 / partial for HTTP-response
streams and some file-API streams, breaking size-threshold branching
in upload code. Bad sample is the simple-vs-chunked Graph upload
pattern; good sample materialises into a Temp Blob first.
Companion change: microsoft/BCAppsBCQuality#28 extends the
orchestrator's bootstrap prompt with the same per-iteration execution
discipline and adds a CI warning when a >5-file PR returns zero agent
findings (regression signal).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
The knowledge corpus now covers performance, security, privacy, upgrade,
style, and UI. Previously only two leaf reviewer skills existed
(al-performance-review, al-security-review), so four of the six domains
had knowledge with no skill sourcing from them. A community reader
landing in privacy/, upgrade/, style/, or ui/ would see articles with
no apparent consumer.
Three changes:
1. Move existing review skills into `microsoft/skills/review/`. The
`review/` subfolder groups all review-kind skills together and leaves
room for future non-review action skills at the `microsoft/skills/`
level. Updates references in README.md, agent-consumption.md, and
skills/entry.md to the new paths.
2. Add four new leaf reviewer skills — al-privacy-review,
al-upgrade-review, al-style-review, al-ui-review — each following
the same DO template as al-performance-review/al-security-review but
sourcing from the corresponding knowledge domain. al-upgrade-review
and al-ui-review return `not-applicable` when the diff contains no
upgrade surface or no page files, respectively.
3. Update al-code-review to compose all six leaf skills and retarget
the dangling references in every populated JSON example
(`use-setloadfields.md`, `no-plaintext-secrets-in-telemetry.md`,
`avoid-implicit-commit.md` — none of which exist in the corpus) to
real knowledge files: `call-setloadfields-before-filters.md`,
`use-secrettext-for-credentials.md`, `never-hardcode-secrets-in-al.md`.
Validator passes with 0 errors / 0 warnings.
