Agent Persona Exploration - 2026-06-30

[github-actions]

Persona Overview

• Agent: agentic-workflows guidance surface
• Personas This Run: Information Worker, Product Manager, QA Tester
• Scenarios Tested: 4
• Average Quality Score: 4.55/5.0

Key Findings

• Strongest guidance clustered around documented patterns for scheduled digests, PR analysis, and workflow_run triage.
• The most consistent recommendations were schedule, pull_request, and scoped workflow_run triggers.
• github via gh-proxy was the default read tool across all tested scenarios, with safe outputs carrying all writes.
• Security guidance was consistently strong: read-only permissions, explicit noop, and duplicate suppression for reports/incidents.
• Main weakness: some scenarios still depend on repository-specific signal availability (for example customer-impact labels or coverage data sources).

Top Patterns

1. Most common trigger types: schedule, pull_request, workflow_run
2. Most recommended tools: github with gh-proxy; no extra tools unless task-specific evidence requires them
3. Security practices observed: read-only agent jobs, safe outputs for mutations, stable dedupe keys, explicit noop paths

View High Quality Responses

• QA Tester — failed workflow triage: best overall fit. Guidance clearly scoped workflow_run, gated on failure conclusions, and recommended stable failure signatures before create-issue.
• Information Worker — stale docs digest: strong scheduled-report pattern with clear create-issue/noop split and good emphasis on explicit reporting windows.
• Product Manager — weekly feature digest: strong recurring-report structure, especially around grouping by impact and suppressing empty or duplicate reports.

View Areas for Improvement

• Coverage analysis needs more explicit guidance on preferred data sources so the agent does not overreach into unnecessary build/network steps.
• Feature digest quality depends on consistent metadata such as labels or issue states; guidance should more directly tell the agent how to degrade gracefully when metadata is sparse.
• Research limitation: this run could not access an interactive custom-agent response endpoint directly; assessment was based on the repository's workflow-authoring guidance and available CLI surface.

Recommendations

1. Strengthen .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md with a compact decision rule for coverage-analysis workflows that prioritizes existing artifacts/PR signals before recomputing coverage.
2. Add a short fallback pattern to .github/aw/report.md or .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md for stakeholder digests when customer-impact metadata is incomplete, so summaries stay useful without inventing classifications.
3. Expand .github/aw/triggers.md or .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md with one concise non-technical example set (documentation governance, PM digests, compliance reviews) to reinforce persona coverage beyond engineering-heavy defaults.

Generated by 🎭 Agent Persona Explorer · 17.2 AIC · ⌖ 13.4 AIC · ⊞ 6.5K · ◷

[pelikhan]

@copilot keep the section 2 in create agentic workflow smaller by moving the context of the section in a triggers.md file and keep a shorter section to select triggers