microsoft / microsoft/finops-toolkit

Add a `code-review` agent skill for GitHub Copilot code review

Open
#2,274 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Type: Feature 💎
Dominant language
PowerShell
Stars
603
Forks
248
Avg merge
7d 11h
Merged PRs (30d)
11

Description

📝 Scenario

As a maintainer reviewing pull requests with GitHub Copilot code review, I need Copilot's automated reviews to apply the FinOps Toolkit's coding standards (Bicep style, PowerShell conventions, KQL operator rules, KQL join kind= rules, content/style guide, etc.) in order to get more relevant, higher-signal feedback on PRs without repeating that context manually in every review.

💎 Solution

GitHub Copilot code review can use agent skills and MCP servers configured in a repository when they're relevant to the code being reviewed. Skills live under .github/skills, and Copilot is more likely to use them for review when the skill directory has a review-focused name/description, such as code-review.

Reference: Using GitHub Copilot code review – MCP servers and agent skills

Add a .github/skills/code-review agent skill to the toolkit that encodes our existing review standards so Copilot's PR reviews are grounded in them, for example:

  • The content/coding standards in docs-wiki/Coding-guidelines.md (sentence casing, Microsoft style guide, Bicep style guide, PowerShell approved verbs/best practices).
  • KQL-specific rules: no tolower()/toupper() in comparisons, explicit kind= on every | join, lookup vs join guidance, leftanti for exclusions, and the ARG exception.
  • Any other review-worthy conventions already enforced by lint tests (e.g. HubsKqlOperators.Tests.ps1, KqlJoinKinds.Tests.ps1) that a reviewer should flag on new code even before CI runs.

See Adding agent skills for GitHub Copilot for the skill file format/setup.

📋 Tasks

### Required tasks
- [ ] Create `.github/skills/code-review/` with a `SKILL.md` (or equivalent) describing review scope and instructions
- [ ] Encode Bicep, PowerShell, KQL, and content/style standards from `docs-wiki/Coding-guidelines.md` into the skill
- [ ] Verify Copilot code review picks up and applies the skill on a test PR
- [ ] Document the new skill (e.g. in `docs-wiki/Coding-guidelines.md` or contributor docs) so contributors know it exists
### Stretch goals
- [ ] Add path-specific `.github/instructions/**/*.instructions.md` files to complement the skill for language-specific review guidance
- [ ] Evaluate enabling automatic Copilot code review on PRs once the skill is validated

ℹ️ Additional context

This repo already has .github/copilot-instructions.md and AGENTS.md for general repo context, but no .github/skills directory yet. A dedicated code-review skill is additive and specifically targeted at review tasks, per GitHub's guidance that skills with review-focused names/descriptions are more likely to be used during Copilot code review.

🙋‍♀️ Ask for the community

We could use your help:

  1. Please vote this issue up (👍) to prioritize it.
  2. Leave comments if you have suggestions for what review standards should be included.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reading docs-wiki/Coding-guidelines.md, .github/copilot-instructions.md, and AGENTS.md, then review HubsKqlOperators.Tests.ps1 and KqlJoinKinds.Tests.ps1 for enforced review rules. Add and document .github/skills/code-review/SKILL.md, then verify the skill on a test PR; done means Copilot applies the stated Bicep, PowerShell, KQL, and style guidance.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
github, powershell
Domain
developer-experience, documentation, tooling
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Active
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
68/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.