Sf AI Agentscript

SF-AI-AgentScript Skill

"Prompt engineering is like writing laws in poetry - beautiful, but not enforceable."

Agent Script transforms agent development from prompt-based suggestions to code-enforced guarantees. This skill guides you through writing, debugging, testing, and deploying Agentforce agents using the Agent Script DSL.

⚠️ CRITICAL WARNINGS

API & Version Requirements

MANDATORY Pre-Deployment Checks

1. default_agent_user MUST be valid - Query: SELECT Username FROM User WHERE Profile.Name = 'Einstein Agent User' AND IsActive = true
2. No mixed tabs/spaces - Use consistent indentation (2-space, 3-space, or tabs - never mix)
3. Booleans are capitalized - Use True/False, not true/false
4. Exactly one start_agent block - Multiple entry points cause compilation failure

⛔ SYNTAX CONSTRAINTS (Validated via Testing + Official Spec)

🔴 Reserved Field Names (Breaking in Recent Releases)

Common field names that cause parse errors:

❌ RESERVED (cannot use as variable/field names):
description, label, is_required, is_displayable, is_used_by_planner

✅ WORKAROUNDS:
description  → descriptions, description_text, desc_field
label        → label_text, display_label, label_field

🔴 Features NOT Valid in Current Release (TDD Validated 2026-01-20)

These features appear in documentation or recipes but do NOT compile in Winter '26.

What DOES work on @utils.transition actions:

actions:
   go_next: @utils.transition to @topic.next
      description: "Navigate to next topic"   # ✅ ONLY this works

Note: Some of these may work on flow:// action targets (not validated). The @utils.transition utility action has limited property support.

🔴 complex_data_type_name Mapping Table (Critical for Actions)

"#1 source of compile errors" - Use this table when defining action inputs/outputs in Agentforce Assets.

Pro Tip: Don't manually edit complex_data_type_name - use the UI dropdown in Agentforce Assets > Action Definition, then export/import the action definition.

⚠️ Canvas View Corruption Bugs

CRITICAL: Canvas view can silently corrupt Agent Script syntax. Make complex edits in Script view.

Safe Workflow:

1. Use Script view for all structural edits (conditionals, actions, transitions)
2. Use Canvas only for visual validation and simple text changes
3. Always review in Script view after any Canvas edit

⚠️ Preview Mode Critical Bugs

CRITICAL REFRESH BUG: Browser refresh required after every Agent Script save before preview works properly.

Pattern for Testing Linked Variables:

# ❌ DOESN'T WORK IN PREVIEW (linked var from session):
RoutableId: linked string
   source: @MessagingSession.Id

# ✅ WORKAROUND FOR TESTING (hardcode value):
RoutableId: mutable string = "test-session-123"
   description: "MessagingSession Id (hardcoded for testing)"

# After testing, switch back to linked for production

Output Property Access Pattern:

# ❌ DOESN'T WORK IN PREVIEW (direct output access):
if @actions.check_status.result == "approved":
   | Approved!

# ✅ CORRECT (assign to variable first):
set @variables.status = @outputs.result
if @variables.status == "approved":
   | Approved!

No Nested if - Two Valid Approaches

# ❌ WRONG - Nested if (causes SyntaxError)
if @variables.software_cost > 0:
   if @variables.software_cost <= 500:
      | Auto-approve this software request.

# ✅ CORRECT Approach 1 - Compound condition (when logic allows)
if @variables.software_cost > 0 and @variables.software_cost <= 500:
   | Auto-approve this software request.

# ✅ CORRECT Approach 2 - Flatten to sequential ifs (for separate messages)
if @variables.order_verified == False or @variables.payment_confirmed == False:
   | ❌ **PROCESSING BLOCKED**
   | Missing requirements:

if @variables.order_verified == False:
   | - Order verification pending

if @variables.payment_confirmed == False:
   | - Payment confirmation pending

When to use each: Use compound conditions when logic permits (single condition block). Use flattening when you need separate conditional outputs that can't be combined.

... is Slot-Filling Syntax (LLM Extracts from Conversation)

# ❌ WRONG - Using ... as default value
order_id: mutable string = ...

# ✅ CORRECT - Use ... only in action parameter binding
reasoning:
   actions:
      search: @actions.search_products
         with query=...           # LLM extracts from user message
         with category=...        # LLM decides based on context
         with limit=10            # Fixed value

Post-Action Directives: Only on @actions.*

# ❌ WRONG - @utils does NOT support set/run/if
go_next: @utils.transition to @topic.main
   set @variables.visited = True   # ERROR!

# ✅ CORRECT - Only @actions.* supports post-action
process: @actions.process_order
   with order_id=@variables.order_id
   set @variables.status = @outputs.status        # ✅ Works
   run @actions.send_notification                 # ✅ Works
   if @outputs.needs_review:                      # ✅ Works
      transition to @topic.review

Helper Topic Pattern (For Demo Agents Without Flows/Apex)

When you need to set variables without backend actions, use dedicated "helper topics":

# Main topic offers LLM-selectable action
topic verify_employee:
   reasoning:
      actions:
         complete_verification: @utils.transition to @topic.verification_success
            description: "Mark employee as verified"
            available when @variables.employee_verified == False

# Helper topic sets variables in instructions, then returns
topic verification_success:
   description: "Set verified state and return"
   reasoning:
      instructions: ->
         set @variables.employee_verified = True
         set @variables.employee_name = "Demo Employee"
         | ✓ Identity verified!
         transition to @topic.verify_employee  # Return to parent

Why this works: set statements ARE valid inside instructions: -> blocks. The topic loop pattern lets you change state without Flows/Apex.

💰 PRODUCTION GOTCHAS: Billing, Determinism & Performance

Credit Consumption Table

Key insight: Framework operations are FREE. Only actions that invoke external services consume credits.

✅ Lifecycle Hooks Validated (v1.3.0): The before_reasoning: and after_reasoning: lifecycle hooks are now TDD-validated. Content goes directly under the block (no instructions: wrapper). See "Lifecycle Hooks" section below for correct syntax.

Cost Optimization Pattern: Fetch data once in before_reasoning:, cache in variables, reuse across topics.

Lifecycle Hooks: before_reasoning: and after_reasoning:

TDD Validated (2026-01-20): These hooks enable deterministic pre/post-processing around LLM reasoning.

topic main:
   description: "Topic with lifecycle hooks"

   # BEFORE: Runs deterministically BEFORE LLM sees instructions
   before_reasoning:
      # Content goes DIRECTLY here (NO instructions: wrapper!)
      set @variables.pre_processed = True
      set @variables.customer_tier = "gold"

   # LLM reasoning phase
   reasoning:
      instructions: ->
         | Customer tier: {!@variables.customer_tier}
         | How can I help you today?

   # AFTER: Runs deterministically AFTER LLM finishes reasoning
   after_reasoning:
      # Content goes DIRECTLY here (NO instructions: wrapper!)
      set @variables.interaction_logged = True
      if @variables.needs_audit == True:
         set @variables.audit_flag = True

Key Points:

• Content goes directly under before_reasoning: / after_reasoning: (NO instructions: wrapper)
• Supports set, if, run statements (same as procedural instructions: ->)
• before_reasoning: is FREE (no credit cost) - use for data prep
• after_reasoning: is FREE (no credit cost) - use for logging, cleanup

❌ WRONG Syntax (causes compile error):

before_reasoning:
   instructions: ->      # ❌ NO! Don't wrap with instructions:
      set @variables.x = True

✅ CORRECT Syntax:

before_reasoning:
   set @variables.x = True   # ✅ Direct content under the block

Supervision vs Handoff (Clarified Terminology)

# HANDOFF - child topic takes over completely:
checkout: @utils.transition to @topic.order_checkout
   description: "Proceed to checkout"
# → @topic.order_checkout generates the user-facing response

# SUPERVISION - parent remains in control:
get_advice: @topic.product_expert
   description: "Consult product expert"
# → @topic.product_expert returns, parent topic synthesizes final response

KNOWN BUG: Adding ANY new action in Canvas view may inadvertently change Supervision references to Handoff transitions.

Action Output Flags for Zero-Hallucination Routing

Key Pattern for Determinism: Control what the LLM can see and say.

When defining actions in Agentforce Assets, use these output flags:

Zero-Hallucination Intent Classification Pattern:

# In Agentforce Assets - Action Definition outputs:
outputs:
   intent_classification: string
      is_displayable: False       # LLM cannot show this to user
      is_used_by_planner: True    # LLM can use for routing decisions

# In Agent Script - LLM routes but cannot hallucinate:
topic intent_router:
   reasoning:
      instructions: ->
         run @actions.classify_intent
         set @variables.intent = @outputs.intent_classification

         if @variables.intent == "refund":
            transition to @topic.refunds
         if @variables.intent == "order_status":
            transition to @topic.orders

Action Chaining with run Keyword

Known quirk: Parent action may complain about inputs needed by chained action - this is expected.

# Chained action execution:
process_order: @actions.create_order
   with customer_id = @variables.customer_id
   run @actions.send_confirmation        # Chains after create_order completes
   set @variables.order_id = @outputs.id

KNOWN BUG: Chained actions with Prompt Templates don't properly map inputs using Input:Query format:

# ❌ MAY NOT WORK with Prompt Templates:
run @actions.transform_recommendation
   with "Input:Reco_Input" = @variables.ProductReco

# ⚠️ TRY THIS (may still have issues):
run @actions.transform_recommendation
   with Reco_Input = @variables.ProductReco

Latch Variable Pattern for Topic Re-entry

Problem: Topic selector doesn't properly re-evaluate after user provides missing input.

Solution: Use a "latch" variable to force re-entry:

variables:
   verification_in_progress: mutable boolean = False

start_agent topic_selector:
   reasoning:
      instructions: ->
         # LATCH CHECK - force re-entry if verification was started
         if @variables.verification_in_progress == True:
            transition to @topic.verification

         | How can I help you today?
      actions:
         start_verify: @topic.verification
            description: "Start identity verification"
            # Set latch when user chooses this action
            set @variables.verification_in_progress = True

topic verification:
   reasoning:
      instructions: ->
         | Please provide your email to verify your identity.
      actions:
         verify: @actions.verify_identity
            with email = ...
            set @variables.verified = @outputs.success
            # Clear latch when verification completes
            set @variables.verification_in_progress = False

Loop Protection Guardrail

Agent Scripts have a built-in guardrail that limits iterations to approximately 3-4 loops before breaking out and returning to the Topic Selector.

Best Practice: Map out your execution paths - particularly topic transitions. Ensure testing covers all paths and specifically check for unintended circular references between topics.

Token & Size Limits

Progress Indicators

Add user feedback during long-running actions:

actions:
   fetch_data: @actions.get_customer_data
      description: "Fetch customer information"
      include_in_progress_indicator: True
      progress_indicator_message: "Fetching your account details..."

VS Code Pull/Push NOT Supported

# ❌ ERROR when using source tracking:
Failed to retrieve components using source tracking:
[SfError [UnsupportedBundleTypeError]: Unsupported Bundle Type: AiAuthoringBundle

# ✅ WORKAROUND - Use CLI directly:
sf project retrieve start -m AiAuthoringBundle:MyAgent
sf agent publish authoring-bundle --api-name MyAgent -o TARGET_ORG

Language Block Quirks

• Hebrew and Indonesian appear twice in the language dropdown
• Selecting from the second set causes save errors
• Use adaptive_response_allowed: True for automatic language adaptation

language:
   locale: en_US
   adaptive_response_allowed: True  # Allow language adaptation

Cross-Skill Orchestration

📋 QUICK REFERENCE: Agent Script Syntax

Block Structure (CORRECTED Order per Official Spec)

config:        # 1. Required: Agent metadata (developer_name, agent_type, default_agent_user)
variables:     # 2. Optional: State management (mutable/linked)
system:        # 3. Required: Global messages and instructions
connections:   # 4. Optional: Escalation routing (Service Agents ONLY)
knowledge:     # 5. Optional: Knowledge base config
language:      # 6. Optional: Locale settings
start_agent:   # 7. Required: Entry point (exactly one)
topic:         # 8. Required: Conversation topics (one or more)

Config Block Field Names (CRITICAL)

⚠️ Common Error: Using incorrect field names from outdated documentation.

# ✅ CORRECT config block:
config:
  developer_name: "my_agent"
  agent_description: "Handles customer support inquiries"
  agent_type: "AgentforceServiceAgent"
  default_agent_user: "agent_user@00dxx000001234.ext"

Naming Rules (All Identifiers)

• Only letters, numbers, underscores
• Must begin with a letter
• No spaces, no consecutive underscores, cannot end with underscore
• Maximum 80 characters

Instruction Syntax Patterns

Transition vs Delegation (CRITICAL DISTINCTION)

# Delegation - returns to current topic after specialist finishes
consulting: @topic.expert_topic
   description: "Get expert advice"

# Transition - permanent handoff, no return
checkout: @utils.transition to @topic.checkout
   description: "Proceed to purchase"

Expression Operators (Safe Subset)

Variable Types

⚠️ Linked variables CANNOT use object or list types

Linked Variable Sources by Agent Type

⚠️ CRITICAL: Not all source bindings work for all agent types.

Workaround for Employee Agents: Employee Agents in the Copilot panel don't automatically receive record context. Use a mutable variable and have the Flow action look up the current record.

# ❌ DOESN'T WORK for Employee Agents:
case_id: linked string
   source: @Record.Id

# ✅ WORKAROUND - use mutable variable:
case_id: mutable string = ""
   description: "Case ID - enter or will be looked up by Flow"

Variable vs Action I/O Type Matrix

Critical distinction: Some types are valid ONLY for action inputs/outputs, NOT for Agent Script variables.

Source: AGENT_SCRIPT.md rules document from trailheadapps/agent-script-recipes

Action Target Protocols

Legend: ✅ TDD = Validated via deployment testing | 📋 Spec = Documented in AGENT_SCRIPT.md spec (requires specific org setup to test)

Registering Flow Actions (REQUIRED for flow:// targets)

Note on flow:// targets: The Flow must be registered as an Action Definition (GenAiFunction) before it can be referenced in Agent Script. Simply creating a Flow is not sufficient.

Workflow to use a Flow in Agent Script:

1. Create Flow with proper output variables (/sf-flow)
2. In Setup > Agentforce > Action Definitions, click "New Action"
3. Select "Flow" as target type, choose your Flow
4. Define input/output schemas (map Flow variables to action I/O)
5. Set planner flags: is_displayable, is_used_by_planner
6. Reference in Agent Script via @actions.YourActionDefinitionName

# After registering "Get_Case_Details" action definition:
reasoning:
   actions:
      lookup_case: @actions.Get_Case_Details
         description: "Fetch case information"
         with case_id = @variables.case_id
         set @variables.case_subject = @outputs.subject

⚠️ Common Error: Referencing flow://MyFlowName without first creating the Action Definition → results in ValidationError: Tool target 'MyFlowName' is not an action definition

Connection Block (Full Escalation Pattern)

⚠️ Service Agents Only: The connections: block is only valid for agent_type: "AgentforceServiceAgent". Employee Agents will fail with Unexpected 'connections' block error. Employee Agents do not support channel-based escalation routing.

connections:
   # Messaging channel escalation
   connection messaging:
      escalation_message: "One moment, I'm transferring our conversation to get you more help."
      outbound_route_type: "OmniChannelFlow"
      outbound_route_name: "<flow://Escalate_Messaging_To_Live_Agent>"
      adaptive_response_allowed: False

   # Voice channel escalation
   connection voice:
      escalation_message: "Please hold while I transfer you to a specialist."
      outbound_route_type: "Queue"
      outbound_route_name: "Support_Queue"
      adaptive_response_allowed: True

   # Web chat escalation
   connection web:
      escalation_message: "Connecting you with a live agent now."
      outbound_route_type: "OmniChannelFlow"
      outbound_route_name: "<flow://Web_Chat_Escalation>"

Key Properties:

🔄 WORKFLOW: Agent Development Lifecycle

Phase 1: Requirements & Design

1. Identify deterministic vs. subjective logic
   • Deterministic: Security checks, financial thresholds, data lookups, counters
   • Subjective: Greetings, context understanding, natural language generation
2. Design FSM architecture - Map topics as states, transitions as edges
3. Define variables - Mutable for state tracking, linked for session context

Phase 2: Agent Script Authoring

1. Create .agent file with required blocks
2. Write topics with instruction resolution pattern:
   • Post-action checks at TOP (triggers on loop)
   • Pre-LLM data loading
   • Dynamic instructions for LLM
3. Configure actions with appropriate target protocols
4. Add available when guards to enforce security

Phase 3: Validation (LSP + CLI)

AUTOMATIC: LSP validation runs on every Write/Edit to .agent files. Errors are reported with line numbers and autofix suggestions.

LSP Validation Loop (Find Error → Autofix)

┌─────────────┐     ┌─────────────┐     ┌─────────────┐
│ Write/Edit  │ ──▶ │ LSP Analyze │ ──▶ │ Report      │
│ .agent file │     │ (automatic) │     │ Errors      │
└─────────────┘     └─────────────┘     └──────┬──────┘
                                               │
      ┌────────────────────────────────────────┘
      ▼
┌─────────────┐     ┌─────────────┐     ┌─────────────┐
│ Claude      │ ──▶ │ Apply Fix   │ ──▶ │ Re-validate │
│ Suggests Fix│     │ (Edit tool) │     │ (loop)      │
└─────────────┘     └─────────────┘     └─────────────┘

LSP Checks (Automatic)

CLI Validation (Before Deploy)

# Validate authoring bundle syntax
sf agent validate authoring-bundle --api-name MyAgent -o TARGET_ORG

Manual Checks

• default_agent_user exists and is active Einstein Agent User
• All topic references resolve to existing topics
• Action targets (flow://, apex://, etc.) exist in org

Phase 4: Testing (Delegate to /sf-ai-agentforce-testing)

1. Batch testing - Run up to 100 test cases simultaneously
2. Quality metrics - Completeness, Coherence, Topic/Action Assertions
3. LLM-as-Judge - Automated scoring against golden responses

Phase 5: Deployment

⚠️ CRITICAL: Use sf agent publish authoring-bundle, NOT sf project deploy start

1. Create bundle directory: force-app/main/default/aiAuthoringBundles/AgentName/
2. Add files:
   • AgentName.agent - Your Agent Script
   • AgentName.bundle-meta.xml - Metadata XML (NOT .aiAuthoringBundle-meta.xml)
3. Publish: sf agent publish authoring-bundle --api-name AgentName -o TARGET_ORG
4. Monitor - Use trace debugging for production issues

Phase 6: CLI Operations

# Retrieve from org
sf agent retrieve --name MyAgent --target-org sandbox

# Validate syntax
sf agent validate authoring-bundle --api-name MyAgent -o TARGET_ORG

# Publish to org (NOT sf project deploy!)
sf agent publish authoring-bundle --api-name MyAgent -o TARGET_ORG

Bundle Structure (CRITICAL)

force-app/main/default/aiAuthoringBundles/
└── MyAgent/
    ├── MyAgent.agent              # Agent Script file
    └── MyAgent.bundle-meta.xml    # NOT .aiAuthoringBundle-meta.xml!

bundle-meta.xml content:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<AiAuthoringBundle xmlns="http://soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata">
    <bundleType>AGENT</bundleType>
</AiAuthoringBundle>

📊 SCORING SYSTEM (100 Points)

Categories

Scoring Rubric Details

Structure & Syntax (20 points)

Deterministic Logic (25 points)

Instruction Resolution (20 points)

FSM Architecture (15 points)

Action Configuration (10 points)

Deployment Readiness (10 points)

Score Thresholds

Score Report Format

📊 AGENT SCRIPT SCORE REPORT
════════════════════════════════════════

Score: 85/100 ⭐⭐⭐⭐ Very Good
├─ Structure & Syntax:    18/20 (90%)
├─ Deterministic Logic:   22/25 (88%)
├─ Instruction Resolution: 16/20 (80%)
├─ FSM Architecture:      12/15 (80%)
├─ Action Configuration:   9/10 (90%)
└─ Deployment Readiness:   8/10 (80%)

Issues:
⚠️ [Deterministic] Missing `available when` on process_refund action
⚠️ [Resolution] Post-action check should be at TOP of instructions
✓ All Structure & Syntax checks passed
✓ All Action Configuration checks passed

🔧 THE 6 DETERMINISTIC BUILDING BLOCKS

These execute as code, not suggestions. The LLM cannot override them.

📐 ARCHITECTURE PATTERNS

Pattern 1: Hub and Spoke

Central router (hub) to specialized topics (spokes). Use for multi-purpose agents.

       ┌─────────────┐
       │ topic_sel   │
       │   (hub)     │
       └──────┬──────┘
    ┌─────────┼─────────┐
    ▼         ▼         ▼
┌────────┐ ┌────────┐ ┌────────┐
│refunds │ │ orders │ │support │
└────────┘ └────────┘ └────────┘

Pattern 2: Verification Gate

Security gate before protected topics. Mandatory for sensitive data.

┌─────────┐     ┌──────────┐     ┌───────────┐
│  entry  │ ──▶ │ VERIFY   │ ──▶ │ protected │
└─────────┘     │  (GATE)  │     │  topics   │
                └────┬─────┘     └───────────┘
                     │ 3 fails
                     ▼
                ┌──────────┐
                │ lockout  │
                └──────────┘

Pattern 3: Post-Action Loop

Topic re-resolves after action completes - put checks at TOP.

topic refund:
  reasoning:
    instructions: ->
      # POST-ACTION CHECK (at TOP - triggers on next loop)
      if @variables.refund_status == "Approved":
        run @actions.create_crm_case
        transition to @topic.success

      # PRE-LLM DATA LOADING
      run @actions.check_churn_risk
      set @variables.risk = @outputs.score

      # DYNAMIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR LLM
      if @variables.risk >= 80:
        | Offer full refund to retain customer.
      else:
        | Offer $10 credit instead.

🐛 DEBUGGING: Trace Analysis

The 6 Span Types

…(truncated)