model-recommendation
$23
Works with
0
total installs
0
this week
28.7K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Install Skill
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
28.7K
stars
Installation Guide
How to use model-recommendation on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your machine
- ›Node.js 16+ with npm — verify with
node --version - ›Active project directory where you want to add
model-recommendation
Run the install command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches model-recommendation from github/awesome-copilot and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate model-recommendation. Access via /model-recommendation in your agent's command palette.
Security Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Documentation
AI Model Recommendation for Copilot Chat Modes and Prompts
Mission
Analyze .agent.md or .prompt.md files to understand their purpose, complexity, and required capabilities, then recommend the most suitable AI model(s) from GitHub Copilot's available options. Provide rationale based on task characteristics, model strengths, cost-efficiency, and performance trade-offs.
Scope & Preconditions
- Input: Path to a
.agent.mdor.prompt.mdfile - Available Models: GPT-4.1, GPT-5, GPT-5 mini, GPT-5 Codex, Claude Sonnet 3.5, Claude Sonnet 4, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Opus 4.1, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Grok Code Fast 1, o3, o4-mini (with deprecation dates)
- Model Auto-Selection: Available in VS Code (Sept 2025+) - selects from GPT-4.1, GPT-5 mini, GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 3.5, Claude Sonnet 4.5 (excludes premium multipliers > 1)
- Context: GitHub Copilot subscription tiers (Free: 2K completions + 50 chat/month with 0x models only; Pro: unlimited 0x + 1000 premium/month; Pro+: unlimited 0x + 5000 premium/month)
Inputs
Required:
${input:filePath:Path to .agent.md or .prompt.md file}- Absolute or workspace-relative path to the file to analyze
Optional:
${input:subscriptionTier:Pro}- User's Copilot subscription tier (Free, Pro, Pro+) - defaults to Pro${input:priorityFactor:Balanced}- Optimization priority (Speed, Cost, Quality, Balanced) - defaults to Balanced
Workflow
1. File Analysis Phase
Read and Parse File:
- Read the target
.agent.mdor.prompt.mdfile - Extract frontmatter (description, mode, tools, model if specified)
- Analyze body content to identify:
- Task complexity (simple/moderate/complex/advanced)
- Required reasoning depth (basic/intermediate/advanced/expert)
- Code generation needs (minimal/moderate/extensive)
- Multi-turn conversation requirements
- Context window needs (small/medium/large)
- Specialized capabilities (image analysis, long-context, real-time data)
Categorize Task Type:
Identify the primary task category based on content analysis:
-
Simple Repetitive Tasks:
- Pattern: Formatting, simple refactoring, adding comments/docstrings, basic CRUD
- Characteristics: Straightforward logic, minimal context, fast execution preferred
- Keywords: format, comment, simple, basic, add docstring, rename, move
-
Code Generation & Implementation:
- Pattern: Writing functions/classes, implementing features, API endpoints, tests
- Characteristics: Moderate complexity, domain knowledge, idiomatic code
- Keywords: implement, create, generate, write, build, scaffold
-
Complex Refactoring & Architecture:
- Pattern: System design, architectural review, large-scale refactoring, performance optimization
- Characteristics: Deep reasoning, multiple components, trade-off analysis
- Keywords: architect, refactor, optimize, design, scale, review architecture
-
Debugging & Problem-Solving:
- Pattern: Bug fixing, error analysis, systematic troubleshooting, root cause analysis
- Characteristics: Step-by-step reasoning, debugging context, verification needs
- Keywords: debug, fix, troubleshoot, diagnose, error, investigate
-
Planning & Research:
- Pattern: Feature planning, research, documentation analysis, ADR creation
- Characteristics: Read-only, context gathering, decision-making support
- Keywords: plan, research, analyze, investigate, document, assess
-
Code Review & Quality Analysis:
- Pattern: Security analysis, performance review, best practices validation, compliance checking
- Characteristics: Critical thinking, pattern recognition, domain expertise
- Keywords: review, analyze, security, performance, compliance, validate
-
Specialized Domain Tasks:
- Pattern: Django/framework-specific, accessibility (WCAG), testing (TDD), API design
- Characteristics: Deep domain knowledge, framework conventions, standards compliance
- Keywords: django, accessibility, wcag, rest, api, testing, tdd
-
Advanced Reasoning & Multi-Step Workflows:
- Pattern: Algorithmic optimization, complex data transformations, multi-phase workflows
- Characteristics: Advanced reasoning, mathematical/algorithmic thinking, sequential logic
- Keywords: algorithm, optimize, transform, sequential, reasoning, calculate
Extract Capability Requirements:
Based on tools in frontmatter and body instructions:
- Read-only tools (search, fetch, usages, githubRepo): Lower complexity, faster models suitable
- Write operations (edit/editFiles, new): Moderate complexity, accuracy important
- Execution tools (runCommands, runTests, runTasks): Validation needs, iterative approach
- Advanced tools (context7/*, sequential-thinking/*): Complex reasoning, premium models beneficial
- Multi-modal (image analysis references): Requires vision-capable models
2. Model Evaluation Phase
Apply Model Selection Criteria:
For each available model, evaluate against these dimensions:
Model Capabilities Matrix
| Model | Multiplier | Speed | Code Quality | Reasoning | Context | Vision | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-4.1 | 0x | Fast | Good | Good | 128K | ✅ | Balanced general tasks, included in all plans |
| GPT-5 mini | 0x | Fastest | Good | Basic | 128K | ❌ | Simple tasks, quick responses, cost-effective |
| GPT-5 | 1x | Moderate | Excellent | Advanced | 128K | ✅ | Complex code, advanced reasoning, multi-turn chat |
| GPT-5 Codex | 1x | Fast | Excellent | Good | 128K | ❌ | Code optimization, refactoring, algorithmic tasks |
| Claude Sonnet 3.5 | 1x | Moderate | Excellent | Excellent | 200K | ✅ | Code generation, long context, balanced reasoning |
| Claude Sonnet 4 | 1x | Moderate | Excellent | Advanced | 200K | ❌ | Complex code, robust reasoning, enterprise tasks |
| Claude Sonnet 4.5 | 1x | Moderate | Excellent | Expert | 200K | ✅ | Advanced code, architecture, design patterns |
| Claude Opus 4.1 | 10x | Slow | Outstanding | Expert | 1M | ✅ | Large codebases, architectural review, research |
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | 1x | Moderate | Excellent | Advanced | 2M | ✅ | Very long context, multi-modal, real-time data |
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (dep.) | 0.25x | Fastest | Good | Good | 1M | ❌ | Fast responses, cost-effective (deprecated) |
| Grok Code Fast 1 | 0.25x | Fastest | Good | Basic | 128K | ❌ | Speed-critical simple tasks, preview (free) |
| o3 (deprecated) | 1x | Slow | Good | Expert | 128K | ❌ | Advanced reasoning, algorithmic optimization |
| o4-mini (deprecated) | 0.33x | Fast | Good | Good | 128K | ❌ | Reasoning at lower cost (deprecated) |
Selection Decision Tree
START
│
├─ Task Complexity?
│ ├─ Simple/Repetitive → GPT-5 mini, Grok Code Fast 1, GPT-4.1
│ ├─ Moderate → GPT-4.1, Claude Sonnet 4, GPT-5
│ └─ Complex/Advanced → Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Opus 4.1
│
├─ Reasoning Depth?
│ ├─ Basic → GPT-5 mini, Grok Code Fast 1
│ ├─ Intermediate → GPT-4.1, Claude Sonnet 4
│ ├─ Advanced → GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 4.5
│ └─ Expert → Claude Opus 4.1, o3 (deprecated)
│
├─ Code-Specific?
│ ├─ Yes → GPT-5 Codex, Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5
│ └─ No → GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 4
│
├─ Context Size?
│ ├─ Small (<50K tokens) → Any model
│ ├─ Medium (50-200K) → Claude models, GPT-5, Gemini
│ ├─ Large (200K-1M) → Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Opus 4.1
│ └─ Very Large (>1M) → Gemini 2.5 Pro (2M), Claude Opus 4.1 (1M)
│
├─ Vision Required?
│ ├─ Yes → GPT-4.1, GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 3.5/4.5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Opus 4.1
│ └─ No → All models
│
├─ Cost Sensitivity? (based on subscriptionTier)
│ ├─ Free Tier → 0x models only: GPT-4.1, GPT-5 mini, Grok Code Fast 1
│ ├─ Pro (1000 premium/month) → Prioritize 0x, use 1x judiciously, avoid 10x
│ └─ Pro+ (5000 premium/month) → 1x freely, 10x for critical tasks
│
└─ Priority Factor?
├─ Speed → GPT-5 mini, Grok Code Fast 1, Gemini 2.0 Flash
├─ Cost → 0x models (GPT-4.1, GPT-5 mini) or lower multipliers (0.25x, 0.33x)
├─ Quality → Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, Claude Opus 4.1
└─ Balanced → GPT-4.1, Claude Sonnet 4, GPT-5
3. Recommendation Generation Phase
Primary Recommendation:
- Identify the single best model based on task analysis and decision tree
- Provide specific rationale tied to file content characteristics
- Explain multiplier cost implications for user's subscription tier
Alternative Recommendations:
- Suggest 1-2 alternative models with trade-off explanations
- Include scenarios where alternatives might be preferred
- Consider priority factor overrides (speed vs. quality vs. cost)
Auto-Selection Guidance:
- Assess if task is suitable for auto model selection (excludes premium models > 1x)
- Explain when manual selection is beneficial vs. letting Copilot choose
- Note any limitations of auto-selection for the specific task
Deprecation Warnings:
- Flag if file currently specifies a deprecated model (o3, o4-mini, Claude Sonnet 3.7, Gemini 2.0 Flash)
- Provide migration path to recommended replacement
- Include timeline for deprecation (e.g., "o3 deprecating 2025-10-23")
Subscription Tier Considerations:
- Free Tier: Recommend only 0x multiplier models (GPT-4.1, GPT-5 mini, Grok Code Fast 1)
- Pro Tier: Balance between 0x (unlimited) and 1x (1000/month) models
- Pro+ Tier: More freedom with 1x models (5000/month), justify 10x usage for exceptional cases
4. Integration Recommendations
Frontmatter Update Guidance:
If file does not specify a model field:
## Recommendation: Add Model Specification
Current frontmatter:
\`\`\`yaml
---
description: "..."
tools: [...]
---
\`\`\`
Recommended frontmatter:
\`\`\`yaml
---
description: "..."
model: "[Recommended Model Name]"
tools: [...]
---
\`\`\`
Rationale: [Explanation of why this model is optimal for this task]
If file already specifies a model:
## Current Model Assessment
Specified model: `[Current Model]` (Multiplier: [X]x)
Recommendation: [Keep current model | Consider switching to [Recommended Model]]
Rationale: [Explanation]
Tool Alignment Check:
Verify model capabilities align with specified tools:
- If tools include
context7/*orsequential-thinking/*: Recommend advanced reasoning models (Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, Claude Opus 4.1) - If tools include vision-related references: Ensure model supports images (flag if GPT-5 Codex, Claude Sonnet 4, or mini models selected)
- If tools are read-only (search, fetch): Suggest cost-effective models (GPT-5 mini, Grok Code Fast 1)
5. Context7 Integration for Up-to-Date Information
Leverage Context7 for Model Documentation:
When uncertainty exists about current model capabilities, use Context7 to fetch latest information:
**Verification with Context7**:
Using `context7/get-library-docs` with library ID `/websites/github_en_copilot`:
- Query topic: "model capabilities [specific capability question]"
- Retrieve current model features, multipliers, deprecation status
- Cross-reference against analyzed file requirements
Example Context7 Usage:
If unsure whether Claude Sonnet 4.5 supports image analysis:
→ Use context7 with topic "Claude Sonnet 4.5 vision image capabilities"
→ Confirm feature support before recommending for multi-modal tasks
Output Expectations
Report Structure
Generate a structured markdown report with the following sections:
# AI Model Recommendation Report
**File Analyzed**: `[file path]`
**File Type**: [chatmode | prompt]
**Analysis Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Subscription Tier**: [Free | Pro | Pro+]
---
## File Summary
**Description**: [from frontmatter]
**Mode**: [ask | edit | agent]
**Tools**: [tool list]
**Current Model**: [specified model or "Not specified"]
## Task Analysis
### Task Complexity
- **Level**: [Simple | Moderate | Complex | Advanced]
- **Reasoning Depth**: [Basic | Intermediate | Advanced | Expert]
- **Context Requirements**: [Small | Medium | Large | Very Large]
- **Code Generation**: [Minimal | Moderate | Extensive]
- **Multi-Modal**: [Yes | No]
### Task Category
[Primary category from 8 categories listed in Workflow Phase 1]
### Key Characteristics
- Characteristic 1: [explanation]
- Characteristic 2: [explanation]
- Characteristic 3: [explanation]
## Model Recommendation
### 🏆 Primary Recommendation: [Model Name]
**Multiplier**: [X]x ([cost implications for subscription tier])
**Strengths**:
- Strength 1: [specific to task]
- Strength 2: [specific to task]
- Strength 3: [specific to task]
**Rationale**:
[Detailed explanation connectList & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
- 1Install product management skill
- 2Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Related Skills
premium-frontend-ui
178github/awesome-copilot
java-springboot
40github/awesome-copilot
grill-me
387mattpocock/skills
premortem
197parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
deslop
118cursor/plugins
framer-motion
99pproenca/dot-skills
Reviews
- SSofia Iyer★★★★★Dec 28, 2024
Registry listing for model-recommendation matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- GGanesh Mohane★★★★★Dec 24, 2024
Keeps context tight: model-recommendation is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ZZaid Patel★★★★★Dec 24, 2024
model-recommendation fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- MMaya Malhotra★★★★★Dec 20, 2024
model-recommendation is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- WWilliam Thomas★★★★★Dec 12, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: model-recommendation is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- MMaya Gupta★★★★★Nov 19, 2024
model-recommendation fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- SSakshi Patil★★★★★Nov 15, 2024
model-recommendation has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- DDiya Johnson★★★★★Nov 15, 2024
Registry listing for model-recommendation matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- MMaya Srinivasan★★★★★Nov 11, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: model-recommendation is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- NNoor Brown★★★★★Nov 3, 2024
model-recommendation is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
showing 1-10 of 65
Discussion
Comments — not star reviews- No comments yet — start the thread.