sensei▌
microsoft/github-copilot-for-azure · updated May 7, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Iteratively improve skill frontmatter compliance and test coverage using the Ralph loop pattern.
- ›Automates a 10-step feedback loop: read skill metadata, score compliance against the agentskills.io spec, scaffold missing tests, improve frontmatter triggers, run tests, validate references, check token budgets, and prompt for commit/issue creation
- ›Targets Medium-High compliance: distinctive WHEN: trigger phrases, descriptions under 60 words, passing tests, and token budgets under 500 lines
Sensei
"A true master teaches not by telling, but by refining." - The Skill Sensei
Automates skill frontmatter improvement using the Ralph loop pattern - iteratively improving skills until they reach Medium-High compliance with passing tests, then checking token usage and prompting for action.
Help
When user says "sensei help" or asks how to use sensei, show this:
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ SENSEI - Skill Frontmatter Compliance Improver ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ ║
║ USAGE: ║
║ Run sensei on <skill-name> # Single skill ║
║ Run sensei on <skill-name> --skip-integration # Fast mode ║
║ Run sensei on <skill1>, <skill2>, ... # Multiple skills ║
║ Run sensei on all Low-adherence skills # Batch by score ║
║ Run sensei on all skills # All skills ║
║ ║
║ EXAMPLES: ║
║ Run sensei on appinsights-instrumentation ║
║ Run sensei on azure-security --skip-integration ║
║ Run sensei on azure-security, azure-observability ║
║ Run sensei on all Low-adherence skills ║
║ ║
║ WHAT IT DOES: ║
║ 1. READ - Load skill's SKILL.md, tests, and token count ║
║ 2. SCORE - Check compliance (Low/Medium/Medium-High/High) ║
║ 3. SCAFFOLD - Create tests from template if missing ║
║ 4. IMPROVE - Add WHEN: triggers (cross-model optimized) ║
║ 5. TEST - Run tests, fix if needed ║
║ 6. REFERENCES- Validate markdown links ║
║ 7. TOKENS - Check token budget, gather suggestions ║
║ 8. SUMMARY - Show before/after with suggestions ║
║ 9. PROMPT - Ask: Commit, Create Issue, or Skip? ║
║ 10. REPEAT - Until Medium-High score + tests pass ║
║ ║
║ TARGET SCORE: Medium-High ║
║ ✓ Description > 150 chars, ≤ 60 words ║
║ ✓ Has "WHEN:" trigger phrases (preferred) ║
║ ✓ No "DO NOT USE FOR:" (unless disambiguation-critical) ║
║ ✓ SKILL.md < 500 tokens (soft limit) ║
║ ║
║ MORE INFO: ║
║ See .github/skills/sensei/README.md for full documentation ║
║ ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
When to Use
- Improving a skill's frontmatter compliance score
- Adding trigger phrases and anti-triggers to skill descriptions
- Batch-improving multiple skills at once
- Auditing and fixing Low-adherence skills
Invocation Modes
Single Skill
Run sensei on azure-deploy
Multiple Skills
Run sensei on azure-security, azure-observability
By Adherence Level
Run sensei on all Low-adherence skills
All Skills
Run sensei on all skills
GEPA Mode (Deep Optimization)
Run sensei on my-skill --gepa
Run sensei on my-skill --gepa --skip-integration
Run sensei on all skills --gepa
When --gepa is used, Step 5 (IMPROVE) is replaced with GEPA evolutionary optimization.
Instead of template-based improvements, GEPA parses trigger prompt arrays from the existing
test harness and combines them with content quality heuristics to build a fitness function.
An LLM proposes and evaluates many candidate improvements automatically. Note: GEPA does not
execute Jest tests directly — it uses the test data (prompts) as evaluation inputs.
GEPA score-only mode (no LLM calls, just evaluate current quality):
Run sensei score my-skill
Run sensei score all skills
The Ralph Loop
For each skill, execute this loop until score >= Medium-High AND tests pass:
- READ - Load
plugin/skills/{skill-name}/SKILL.md, tests, and token count - SCORE - Run spec-based compliance check (see SCORING.md):
- Validate
nameper agentskills.io spec (no--, no start/end-, lowercase alphanumeric) - Check description length and word count (≤60 words)
- Check triggers (WHEN: preferred, USE FOR: accepted)
- Warn on "DO NOT USE FOR:" (risky in multi-skill environments — exception: REQUIRED for skills that share trigger overlap with broader skills like
azure-prepare) - Preserve optional spec fields (
license,metadata,allowed-tools) if present
- Validate
- CHECK - If score >= Medium-High AND tests pass → go to TOKENS step
- SCAFFOLD - If
tests/{skill-name}/doesn't exist, create fromtests/_template/ - IMPROVE FRONTMATTER - Add WHEN: triggers (stay under 60 words and 1024 chars)
5b. IMPROVE WITH GEPA (when
--gepaflag is set) — Replaces step 5 (IMPROVE FRONTMATTER) with automated optimization; step 6 (IMPROVE TESTS) still runs normally:- Auto-discovers
tests/{skill-name}/triggers.test.tsand extracts prompt arrays - Builds a GEPA evaluator scoring content quality + trigger accuracy based on those trigger prompt arrays (not Jest test pass/fail results)
- Runs
python .github/skills/sensei/scripts/gepa/auto_evaluator.py optimize --skill {skill-name} --skills-dir plugin/skills --tests-dir tests - Shows diff of optimized SKILL.md for user approval
- GEPA uses existing test trigger definitions as configuration — it does not execute, replace, or modify Jest tests
- Auto-discovers
- IMPROVE TESTS - Update
shouldTriggerPromptsandshouldNotTriggerPromptsto match the finalized frontmatter (including any GEPA changes) - VERIFY - Run
cd tests && npm test -- --testPathPatterns={skill-name} - VALIDATE REFERENCES - Run
cd scripts && npm run references {skill-name}to check markdown links - TOKENS - Check token budget and line count (< 500 lines per spec), gather optimization suggestions
- SUMMARY - Display before/after comparison with unimplemented suggestions
- PROMPT - Ask user: Commit, Create Issue, or Skip?
- REPEAT - Go to step 2 (max 5 iterations per skill)
Scoring Criteria (Quick Reference)
Sensei validates skills against the agentskills.io specification. See SCORING.md for full details.
| Score | Requirements |
|---|---|
| Invalid | Name fails spec validation (consecutive hyphens, start/end hyphen, uppercase, etc.) |
| Low | Basic description, no explicit triggers |
| Medium | Has trigger keywords/phrases, description > 150 chars, >60 words |
| Medium-High | Has "WHEN:" (preferred) or "USE FOR:" triggers, ≤60 words |
| High | Medium-High + compatibility field |
Target: Medium-High (distinctive triggers, concise description)
⚠️ "DO NOT USE FOR:" is risky in multi-skill environments (15+ overlapping skills) — causes keyword contamination on fast-pattern-matching models. Safe for small, isolated skill sets. Use positive routing with
WHEN:for cross-model safety.Exception — disambiguation-critical skills: When a skill's
USE FORtriggers directly overlap with a broader skill (e.g.,azure-prepareowns "deploy to Azure"),DO NOT USE FOR:is REQUIRED to prevent the broader skill from capturing prompts that belong to the specialized skill. Removing it causes routing regressions. Integration tests validate this routing -- run them before removing anyDO NOT USE FOR:clause.
Strongly recommended (reported as suggestions if missing):
license— identifies the license applied to the skillmetadata.version— tracks the skill version for consumers
Frontmatter Template
Per the agentskills.io spec, required and optional fields:
---
name: skill-name
description: "[ACTION VERB] [UNIQUE_DOMAIN]. [One clarifying sentence]. WHEN: \"trigger 1\", \"trigger 2\", \"trigger 3\"."
license: MIT
metadata:
version: "1.0"
# Other optional spec fields — preserve if already present:
# metadata.author: example-org
# allowed-tools: Bash(git:*) Read
---
IMPORTANT: Use inline double-quoted strings for descriptions. Do NOT use
>-folded scalars (incompatible with skills.sh). Do NOT use|literal blocks (preserves newlines). Keep total description under 1024 characters and ≤60 words.
⚠️ "DO NOT USE FOR:" carries context-dependent risk. In multi-skill environments (10+ skills with overlapping domains), anti-trigger clauses introduce the very keywords that cause wrong-skill activation on Claude Sonnet and fast-pattern-matching models (evidence). For small, isolated skill sets (1-5 skills), the risk is low. When in doubt, use positive routing with
WHEN:and distinctive quoted phrases.Exception:
DO NOT USE FOR:is REQUIRED when a specialized skill's triggers overlap with a broader skill (e.g.,azure-hosted-copilot-sdkvs.azure-prepareon "deploy to Azure"). Without the negative discriminator, the broader skill captures prompts that should route to the specialized one. Always run integration tests before removing aDO NOT USE FOR:clause.
Test Scaffolding
When tests don't exist, scaffold from tests/_template/:
cp -r tests/_template tests/{skill-name}
Then update:
SKILL_NAMEconstant in all test filesshouldTriggerPrompts- 5+ prompts matching new frontmatter triggersshouldNotTriggerPrompts- 5+ prompts matching anti-triggers
Commit Messages:
sensei: improve {skill-name} frontmatter
Constraints
- Only modify
plugin/skills/- these are the Azure skills used by Copilot .github/skills/contains meta-skills like sensei for developer tooling- Max 5 iterations per skill before moving on
- Description must stay under 1024 characters
- SKILL.md should stay under 500 tokens (soft limit)
- Tests must pass before prompting for action
- User chooses: Commit, Create Issue, or Skip after each skill
Flags
| Flag | Description |
|---|---|
--skip-integration |
Skip integration tests for faster iteration. Only runs unit and trigger tests. |
--gepa |
Use GEPA evolutionary optimization instead of template-based improvement. Auto-discovers tests and builds evaluator at runtime. |
⚠️ Skipping integration tests speeds up the loop but may miss runtime issues. Consider running full tests before final commit.
Reference Documentation
- SCORING.md - Detailed scoring criteria
- LOOP.md - Ralph loop workflow details
- EXAMPLES.md - Before/after examples
- TOKEN-INTEGRATION.md - Token budget integration
Related Skills
- markdown-token-optimizer - Token analysis and optimization
- skill-authoring - Skill writing guidelines
How to use sensei 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 development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add sensei
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches sensei from GitHub repository microsoft/github-copilot-for-azure and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate sensei. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /sensei) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification 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 development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & 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
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share 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
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.8★★★★★25 reviews- ★★★★★Kiara Wang· Dec 20, 2024
sensei has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Mia Menon· Dec 16, 2024
Useful defaults in sensei — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Dhruvi Jain· Dec 8, 2024
sensei fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Oshnikdeep· Nov 27, 2024
Registry listing for sensei matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Ganesh Mohane· Oct 18, 2024
sensei reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Arjun Kim· Sep 17, 2024
sensei fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Sep 9, 2024
I recommend sensei for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Aug 28, 2024
Useful defaults in sensei — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Arjun White· Aug 8, 2024
We added sensei from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Arya Chawla· Jul 27, 2024
sensei reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
showing 1-10 of 25