186691f815
* Add 3 more AL/BC patterns from CURABIS Academy testing course material Third batch from CURABIS ApS: item-ledger-entry document-no lookup after Ship-and-Invoice posting, TestPage.Visible()/.Enabled() as the mechanism for verifying field UI state, and LibraryUtility.GenerateGUID() for collision-free test fixture values. * Address Jesper Schulz-Wedde's review on PR #158 - use-generateguid-for-unique-test-fixture-values.md: GenerateGUID() is a Code[10] number-series value, not a real GUID; truncating it with CopyStr for a shorter field cuts off the changing digits. Point to GenerateRandomCode/GenerateRandomCodeWithLength/GenerateRandomXMLText instead, which verify uniqueness against the actual table. - Split use-testpage-visible-enabled-to-verify-field-ui-state.md: drop its editability claim (the sample opens with OpenView() and asserts Enabled(), which verifies enabled state, not editability — Editable() and Enabled() are distinct TestField methods). New companion article use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.md covers Editable() with OpenEdit() specifically. - Wire GenerateGUID/CopyStr and TestPage Visible/Enabled/Editable cues into al-testing-review.md, and the Item Ledger Entry/Last Shipping No. posting cue into al-data-modeling-review.md. The Item Ledger Entry article itself was independently verified against current BCApps source and needs no changes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * Address second round of Jesper Schulz-Wedde's review on PR #158 - use-generateguid-for-unique-test-fixture-values.md/.good.al: documented each LibraryUtility helper's actual behavior, verified against LibraryUtility.Codeunit.al. GenerateRandomCode opens the target table as a temporary RecordRef, so despite taking TableNo it never checks real data. GenerateRandomXMLText performs no table lookup at all. Only GenerateRandomCodeWithLength/GenerateRandomCode20 (capped at Code[10]/ Code[20]) genuinely verify against the real table. Fixture switched to GenerateRandomCodeWithLength where the comment claims verified uniqueness. - al-testing-review.md: rewired the cue to catch the actual anti-pattern (hardcoded literals, hand-built uniqueness, short-field GUID truncation) instead of only matching the compliant GenerateGUID()+CopyStr shape; broadened tokens to include TestPage, Library - Utility, and .Visible()/.Enabled()/.Editable(). - al-data-modeling-review.md: restricted the Item Ledger Entry Last-Shipping-No. cue to sales combined posting; purchase combined posting is Receive+Invoice and uses different fields entirely. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * Fix remaining correctness issues from Jesper's 2026-09-15 re-review - use-generateguid-for-unique-test-fixture-values.md: narrowed the collision rule to primary-key/unique-lookup fields - an ordinary descriptive field carries no uniqueness constraint, so a hardcoded or deterministic value there isn't the anti-pattern (the article and its al-testing-review.md worklist cue both said "primary-key or descriptive field"). Also corrected GenerateRandomCode: it opens its target table as a temporary RecordRef that starts and stays empty, so its repeat/until loop always exits after one iteration and never retries even within a single test run - the "non-colliding within a test run" claim was false. It's the rightmost N characters of GenerateGUID()'s sequential series, so a short field's value cycles (Code[1] repeats every 10 calls, Code[2] every 100). Verified against LibraryUtility.Codeunit.al in the BCApps reference clone. - item-ledger-entry-document-no-follows-last-shipping-no: both fixtures called FindSet() without consuming its optional Boolean, which raises a runtime error on an empty result set - the opposite of the article's own claimed "silently matches zero rows, no error" behavior. Wrapped in `if ... then;` per the existing guard-database-reads.good.al idiom. - al-data-modeling-review.md: widened both not-applicable scope clauses (intro and outcome) to include dimension wiring, posting- routine structure, and Item Ledger Entry document-number lookups - the leaf declared itself not-applicable outside setup/master/key/ numbering/block/audit surfaces despite having a targeted cue for this PR's own new article. - Converted this PR's 8 plain-backtick "See sample: `x.good.al`." references (across all 4 new articles) to the READ-convention markdown-link form required by Knowledge-Retrieval.ps1. Rebased onto upstream/main (one conflict in al-data-modeling-review.md intro wording, merged). * Stop routing GenerateRandomCode20 as compliant for shorter fields al-testing-review.md's cue presented GenerateRandomCodeWithLength and GenerateRandomCode20 as interchangeable options for "a shorter field needing real verified uniqueness." They aren't: verified against LibraryUtility.Codeunit.al, GenerateRandomCode20 truncates GenerateGUID()'s sequential value down to the target field's length by keeping the leftmost (slowest-changing) characters via PadStr, so its retry loop against a field shorter than 20 can churn through the same truncated prefix for a long time. GenerateRandomCodeWithLength has no such problem (it generates exactly the requested length of random text). The knowledge article itself already scoped GenerateRandomCode20 to Code[20] correctly - only the skill cue needed narrowing to match. --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .claude-plugin | ||
| .github | ||
| community | ||
| custom | ||
| docs | ||
| evaluation | ||
| microsoft | ||
| schemas | ||
| skills | ||
| tools | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| CODEOWNERS | ||
| LICENSE | ||
| plugin.json | ||
| README.md | ||
| SECURITY.md | ||
BC Quality - Don’t teach one agent. Teach the ecosystem. 🤝
Quality skills and knowledge that help AI tools make better Business Central development decisions: catch BC-specific defects, avoid misleading advice, and explain findings with references you can read.
BCQuality contains knowledge and reusable skills, not agents or a Business Central extension. Your host supplies the agent. You can install the content as a plugin, use it from another integration, or browse the knowledge directly.
Quick start
The walkthrough below uses GitHub Copilot CLI in a terminal, not the Copilot Chat panel in VS Code. First install Copilot CLI and sign in. Your account and organization policy must allow its use. You do not need to clone BCQuality, build a runner, or deploy an app to Business Central for this source-review example.
Standalone plugin installation
Run these commands in your terminal:
copilot plugin install microsoft/BCQuality
copilot plugin list
The list should include bcquality. The plugin currently exposes the
al-code-review skill. Installation and skill
discovery are the general pattern; reviewing an app is one example of using it.
Example: Review a complete app folder
Start a new CLI session in your own app folder, replacing the example path:
cd "C:\Repos\MyBusinessCentralApp"
copilot
Approve access only to a project you trust, then ask:
Use the installed al-code-review skill to review the complete Business Central app in this folder without changing my source files. Return the complete BCQuality findings report.
The folder should contain app.json and your AL source; it does not need
to be a Git repository. On macOS or Linux, use your app's local path instead.
Expect a report for each selected review, with findings, source locations,
severity, confidence, and references to the relevant guidance. Some hosts show
the structured JSON directly. completed with no findings means nothing was
flagged in that review's scope; partial or failed is not a clean result.
See reading your results.
PowerShell 7
(pwsh) is recommended for fast knowledge discovery. If it is unavailable,
the review can still discover knowledge by reading the folders.
Documentation
| I want to... | Start here |
|---|---|
| Choose direct reading, a supplied skill, or my own agent | Ways to use BCQuality |
| Review a file, changes, a branch, or a particular concern | Using BCQuality |
| Resolve setup problems, incomplete reviews, or incorrect findings | Troubleshooting and support |
| Browse the available guidance | Knowledge by domain |
| Configure the plugin or use my organization's rules | Customizing BCQuality |
| Contribute knowledge or improve a rule | Your first contribution |
| Connect a host, agent, or CI integration | Minimal integration example |
All documentation and technical references.
Scope
Today's curated content covers technical AL code review and a focused Supply Chain Management (SCM) functional domain. It augments the agent's judgment; it is not an exhaustive BC manual or a substitute for compilation, analyzers, tests, or human review. See coverage and limits for the available domains and the difference between a folder review and a comparison. Mechanical issues already enforced by the AL compiler or standard analyzers are intentionally left to those deterministic tools rather than duplicated here.
The SCM domain covers selected inventory, costing, reservation, tracking, and warehouse/posting workflows, not exhaustive supply chain validation. Broader functional coverage such as Finance, Manufacturing, Jobs, and Service, and technologies such as PowerShell, pipelines, and Power Platform, remain valid future scope, not current coverage claims.
What's in this repo
Knowledge articles cover one concern each. Skills tell an agent how to find and apply the relevant knowledge. Both live in three layers:
| Layer | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Microsoft | Microsoft-endorsed skills and their knowledge. |
| Community | Community-owned skills and their knowledge. |
| Custom | Organization-specific additions and overrides in your own fork. |
All three are enabled by default; Custom is empty upstream. You do not need to configure layers to get started.
Versioning
Update the installed plugin from your terminal, then start a new session:
copilot plugin update bcquality
Plugin versions and content-release tags are different. For reproducible runs and organization forks, see updates and versions.
What belongs here
Knowledge belongs here when it prevents a BC-specific mistake an otherwise capable agent would make, including false-positive findings. BC facts belong in knowledge articles, not skill instructions. See the admission test and examples.
Contributing
Partners are welcome to contribute to the layer that owns the domain, regardless of affiliation. Start with the contribution guide. To report a problem without authoring a rule, see support.