- name
- ai-agent-creator
- description
- Architecture-first Microsoft-cloud AI design for new applications, platform-managed agents, or AI capabilities in existing systems. Use when discovery, a functional/technical specification, editable draw.io views, AI token and platform-consumption estimates, cost scenarios, and an implementation plan must precede code. Produces a mandatory cost-estimate.md for every confirmed architecture. Ends with a reconciled architecture-package handoff; standalone SDK help, existing-agent operations, implementation, deployment, and troubleshooting use other workflows.
# AI Agent Creator
Produce a reconciled architecture package under `docs/architecture/`:
```text
docs/architecture/
solution.drawio
solution.md
specification.md
implementation-plan.md
cost-estimate.md
```
The diagram shows boundaries; `solution.md` owns design decisions;
`specification.md` owns requirements and acceptance criteria; the plan owns later
delivery work; `cost-estimate.md` owns consumption quantities, pricing evidence,
calculations, and totals. Link these records rather than duplicating their content.
**Planning boundary:** change only domain records and the architecture package.
Keep application source, dependency manifests/lockfiles, tests, application assets,
IaC, cloud resources, and deployments unchanged. Implementation belongs to a
separate workflow that the user starts manually.
Use read-only evidence and already-available validation tools. Keep delivery-tool
installation, extension setup, authentication, and environment preparation in
the later workflow that needs them.
## Voice
Use this voice for every user-facing moment: discovery questions,
recommendations, shared-understanding summaries, decision requests,
status/handoff reports, and conversational explanations.
Give brief context before asking or stating anything. Write in ASD-STE100
Simplified Technical English: active voice, short sentences, one idea per
sentence. Put dense examples and alternatives in short bullet lists. Use the
repository's ubiquitous language: read `CONTEXT.md` and `docs/adr/` per
`docs/agents/domain.md`. If the repository instead defines `GLOSSARY.md` or
`GLOSSARY-MAP.md`, follow those.
Keep dense technical artifacts exact: schemas, identifiers, tables, evidence
citations, and code/API names. Simplify the surrounding sentences, not these
terms.
## Resume from evidence
Inspect the conversation and existing records before selecting the next step.
Approval applies to the current baseline, not to later material changes.
| Evidence | Next step |
| --- | --- |
| The discovery frontier is open or shared-understanding confirmation is missing | Discover |
| A later user turn explicitly confirmed the shared-understanding record | Architect |
| The five artifacts are ready but bounded pricing has not run | Run the cost-estimation consultation, reconcile, and complete the package |
| The current, complete package is reconciled | Hand off and stop; request acceptance only when the user or governance process explicitly requires it |
| Material scope or design changed after confirmation/approval | Preserve history; return to the affected discovery or package-review gate |
The initial request, silence, batch execution, and the agent's own summary are
not confirmation of an unresolved discovery or architecture decision. Do not turn
ordinary package completion into a confirmation gate. Use `Ready for review` as
the reconciled terminal status unless explicit acceptance was requested and
obtained; do not default to `Awaiting approval` or `Ready for approval`.
## 1. Discover
Read [discovery quality](references/discovery-quality.md) before the first
question; it owns the frontier, decision statuses, boundary ladder, shared record,
and discovery completion criterion.
1. **Inspect:** classify the workspace as empty, existing application/platform
configuration, or architecture-only. Reuse repository and enterprise facts;
an empty repository does not establish an empty enterprise estate.
2. **Frame:** identify the outcome, actor, and candidate journey. Treat *agent*,
*copilot*, and *assistant* as intent signals, not runtime decisions.
3. **Resolve:** load `grilling` for an open frontier. Ask the whole answerable
frontier through the question form tool. When enough prerequisites are known,
present concrete target-architecture options with a recommendation, meaningful
alternatives, and a visible custom-answer path. End the turn after each round;
recompute only after the user's answers.
4. **Model and compare:** load `domain-modeling` when resolved terminology changes;
update `CONTEXT.md` and offer ADRs for consequential trade-offs. Apply the
discovery contract's agent-intent test and use the
[selection matrix](references/azure-patterns/runtimes/README.md) when platform,
channel, or model choices become answerable. Research and propose the coherent
target architecture during discovery; do not replace that proposal with an
abstract request to delegate selection. Reopen any newly exposed frontier.
5. **Confirm:** once the frontier is empty, present the discovery contract's
shared-understanding record, ask for confirmation, and end the turn.
When a recommendation needs current product facts, read the
[evidence contract](references/microsoft-learn-evidence.md) and verify those facts
before presenting the recommendation.
**Complete when:** the discovery contract's criteria hold and a later user turn
explicitly confirms its record. That record becomes the specification baseline.
## 2. Architect
Enter only from confirmed discovery. Design responsibilities before service
mappings; preserve the confirmed target architecture, custom choices, and any
explicitly delegated lower-level decisions.
1. **Select:** read the
[selection matrix](references/azure-patterns/runtimes/README.md) for platform,
channel, ownership, and model-inference boundaries, including no-agent designs.
Read the [pattern index](references/azure-patterns/README.md) to select workload
cards and runtime recipes; load only matching branches.
2. **Verify:** use the [evidence contract](references/microsoft-learn-evidence.md)
for decision-bearing product claims and compatibility gates. Consult
[specialist routing](references/specialist-routing.md) only for the selected
branches; specialists remain inside the approval boundary.
3. **Specify:** read [specification quality](references/specification-quality.md).
Start or update the one specification from confirmed discovery, then complete
its technical coverage and traceability alongside the design and plan.
4. **Record:** read [architecture quality](references/architecture-quality.md).
Write `solution.md` using its structure, decision coverage, and diagram views.
5. **Plan:** read [implementation plan quality](references/implementation-plan-quality.md).
Map later phases to specification IDs and architecture responsibilities.
Describe configuration or code work according to the selected platform.
6. **Estimate:** read [cost and consumption estimate quality](references/cost-estimation-quality.md).
Load `cost-estimation` as a bounded pricing consultation, then write
`cost-estimate.md` for every confirmed architecture. Model token or
platform consumption, multi-agent amplification, retrieval/tool/media units,
infrastructure, and low/expected/high scenarios. Execute every pricing step
supported by the confirmed model, platform, region, currency, and usage evidence
before final reconciliation. Merge specialist results into the required
modernization document structure rather than substituting a shorter report.
Ask only for the minimum missing details needed to disambiguate a meter,
preferably in one consolidated cost-input round. Use verified prices when
available and explicit attempted-source/tool `Not calculated` blockers when
they are not.
7. **Diagram and review:** load `cloud-architecture-diagram` for creation/editing,
icons, validation, privacy, rendering, and independent review. Use the four
views and acceptance contract in architecture quality. Preserve existing
unrelated pages and hand edits. Treat the diagram specialist's independent
review gate as binding. Use a reviewer mode that preserves context for its
targeted recheck when the available tooling supports multi-turn review. A
one-shot review that found blocking or material defects does not become a
passed independent review through local inspection after repair.
8. **Reconcile and hand off:** check all five artifacts against their contracts and the
current baseline. Resolve conflicts and every architecture-changing choice.
Keep only delivery parameters that preserve the selected topology as owned
deferrals. Record blocked or unavailable diagram evidence exactly. Mark the
package exactly `Ready for review` and present the handoff without asking for
confirmation unless the user explicitly requested formal acceptance or an
unresolved material decision truly requires their choice. Do not use
`Awaiting approval` or `Ready for approval` for ordinary completion. If formal
acceptance is required, ask once after all five artifacts and the pricing
attempt are complete; never reopen acceptance merely because cost was deferred.
**Complete when:** all five artifacts exist and agree, every contract is accounted
for, review status is recorded, the bounded pricing consultation has completed or
recorded a concrete blocker, and package status is `Ready for review` or explicitly
accepted.
## 3. Hand off and stop
Record the package revision, status, and any explicit architecture-only acceptance
in the lifecycle record and specification.
Report the five paths, including the cost estimate and its pricing status, current
package/review status, remaining work and owners,
and the separately initiated workflow needed for delivery. Name later specialists
without invoking them.
Stop after handoff. Approval, a specification, an original request to implement,
or "continue" does not start implementation/planning, generate execution-ready
tickets, or provision/deploy resources.
**Complete when:** the reconciled package is handed off, later owners are clear,
and the planning boundary remains intact.
Voir sur GitHub