Give an Agent the right knowledge, method, and operations.

Assign one responsibility to each component

Think of the Agent as the assistant responsible for the outcome. Its instructions explain the job and standards. Knowledge gives it reference material to consult. A Skill describes a reusable way to perform work. A Tool carries out an operation such as interacting with an available system or working with a file.

These components solve different problems. Adding more reference files does not grant a missing operation. Enabling a Tool does not explain which evaluation criteria to apply. A detailed Skill cannot make an unavailable source accessible. Start by locating the missing responsibility rather than adding every capability you can find.

Keep stable references separate from live inputs

For a proposal-review Agent, an approved evaluation checklist is reusable knowledge. The current supplier proposals belong with the specific review in its Project. This separation helps you reuse the method while changing the evidence. Identify the owner and date of references that may be revised.

Do not treat saved knowledge as a live connection to its original source. If a policy or source document changes, review which copy the Agent uses. Ask it to name the file behind a material conclusion. When two references disagree, the role needs an explicit precedence rule or a question to the person responsible.

Map a fictional review to its required pieces

In this fictional example, Cedar Studio wants a repeatable supplier review. The Agent drafts a recommendation from files and highlights unresolved terms. Its first version does not need to operate a supplier portal. The table makes the configuration reviewable before any real proposal is provided.

A useful configuration is a small explanation of why each piece exists. If you cannot identify the step that needs a capability, leave it out of the first trial. This is a way to simplify evaluation; it does not claim that all Tools share the same permission model or operate in the same environment.

Test the assembled Agent on a known example

Use two short fictional proposals with deliberately different terms. Ask for a table with a source location and uncertainty column. Check the comparison against the inputs, then open the output file. This tests whether the pieces work together instead of merely confirming that each option appears in the Agent’s settings.

Change one dimension for a second test: remove a source, revise the checklist, or supply a proposal with ambiguous language. The output should expose the limitation. A missing sentence in a source should not become a confident assumption just because the Agent has a detailed role description.

Diagnose the failure before changing access

If the criteria are wrong, inspect instructions and reference knowledge. If the method is inconsistent, review the selected Skill and the requested output. If a source cannot be opened, check that the file is actually available in the relevant context. If an operation is unavailable, inspect the chosen Tool and active environment.

Do not respond to a failed draft by immediately adding external account access. First ask what evidence or operation is missing. A research answer, a saved deliverable, and a change in an external application are separate outcomes. Verify the one you intended before expanding the Agent’s responsibilities.

Review a copy before giving it real work

You can customize an Agent and test it privately, or inspect an Agent copied from a shared link or Marketplace. Review its instructions, knowledge, Skills, and Tools before adding your files. A familiar name or polished description does not establish that its assumptions match your workflow.

After editing the setup, repeat the small evaluation and use version history if you need to restore an earlier version. Review the Session approval mode separately. Keep a short configuration note listing the task, references, required operations, and tests; that note is useful when the Agent is revisited or copied for another purpose.

Try it with a small example.

Before you use the result.

• Each capability supports a named task step.
• Stable references and current Project inputs are distinguishable.
• The Agent handles a missing source without guessing.
• The saved output matches the expected format and evidence.
• A copied Agent is reviewed before receiving real work.