First-pass, I asked ChatGPT to share what files it knew about.
"Recommended minimal set (80/20): If you only add four files, make them these:
That combination gives:
"Which is exactly what agents lack."
README.mdWhy it helps: This is the primary grounding document for the agent:
Agents will read this automatically if present.
AGENTS.mdWhy it helps: This is the single most important agent-specific file. It answers:
Think of it as system prompt for your repo.
ARCHITECTURE.mdWhy it helps: Agents struggle with implicit architecture. This file makes it explicit.
DECISIONS.mdWhy it helps: Agents often “fix” things you chose intentionally. This prevents that.
Why it helps: This aligns agent output with your human workflow.
TASKS.md or ROADMAP.mdWhy it helps: Agents perform better when they know what matters next.
STYLE.md or CODING_STANDARDS.mdWhy it helps: Prevents stylistic churn.
PROMPTS.mdWhy it helps: This is a prompt library for repeatable agent use.
Prompt: Show me an example workflow using a coding agent in Visual Studio Code. It does not have to be Copilot but it must not cost anything to set up and run.
Response:
Below is a concrete, end-to-end example workflow for using a coding agent in Visual Studio Code that is 100% free to set up and run. No Copilot, no subscriptions.
I’ll use VS Code + Continue.dev + a local LLM via Ollama. This is currently the most practical “agent-like” setup that costs nothing and works offline once installed.
qwen2.5-coder, deepseek-coder, or codellamaWhy this works:
ollama --versionDownload a coding model: Pick one (all are free):
ollama pull qwen2.5-coder:7bollama pull deepseek-coder:6.7bollama pull codellama:7bInstall Continue.dev in VS Code:
Configure Continue to use Ollama: Open the Continue config file (Command Palette → “Continue: Open Config”). Example minimal config:
{
"models": [ { "title": "Local Coder",
"provider": "ollama",
"model": "qwen2.5-coder:7b"
} ],
"defaultModel": "Local Coder"
}
Then restart VSCode.
Let’s say you have a small project:
inventory-app/
├─ src/
│ ├─ inventory.py
│ ├─ storage.py
│ └─ api.py
└─ tests/
└─ test_inventory.py`
inventory.py is buggy and poorly structured.
Open Continue sidebar (chat panel).
Prompt:
Scan this repository and explain what it does. Call out any design or correctness issues.
What happens:
This already goes beyond autocomplete.
Prompt:
Refactor the inventory logic to separate domain logic from persistence.
Use a repository pattern and update any affected tests.
What the agent does:
inventory.pystorage.pyYou approve or reject each change.
Now run tests: pytest
A test fails.
Prompt:
Tests are failing. Here is the error output:
(paste traceback)
Fix the issue without changing test intent.
Agent workflow:
Prompt:
Add support for bulk inventory updates via a new API endpoint.
Requirements:
Accept JSON array
Validate quantities
Return partial success report
The agent will:
api.pyYou can nudge it:
“Don’t add new dependencies.”
You can switch tone:
Prompt:
Review this code as a senior engineer.
Focus on concurrency, error handling, and API design.
This is excellent for:
Last modified 23 December 2025