Streamlining Copilot Code Reviews: Managing Custom Instructions for Enhanced Software Project Development

In the rapidly evolving landscape of software project development, tools like GitHub Copilot are becoming indispensable for boosting developer productivity. One powerful feature, "Review uncommitted changes," offers AI-powered feedback directly within VS Code's Source Control. However, a recent community discussion highlighted a key challenge: effectively managing custom instructions for this feature.

The Challenge: Granular Custom Instructions for Copilot Code Reviews

A developer, ciprian1992, initiated a discussion seeking a way to provide more granular, file-type-specific instructions to Copilot's "Review uncommitted changes" feature. The core issue was that while instructions could be defined in .github/copilot-instructions.md, attempts to reference additional files for coding style guides (e.g., split per file type using applyTo syntax) or use VS Code settings like "github.copilot.chat.reviewSelection.instructions" or "chat.instructionsFilesLocations" proved ineffective.

The developer's specific attempt to reference other instruction files within copilot-instructions.md looked like this:

# Review Guidelines
Refer to typescript instructions file when reviewing typescript instructions.

Unfortunately, this approach did not yield the desired results, leading to a query about whether additional instruction files could be referenced or utilized in any other way.

Current Limitations and Workarounds for Customizing Copilot

The replies from FrannnnDev and rinas21 provided clear answers, confirming the current limitations:

• Single Source of Truth: Currently, "Review uncommitted changes" strictly adheres to instructions defined within the .github/copilot-instructions.md file. It does not support referencing external instruction files from within this primary file.
• VS Code Settings Ineffective: VS Code-specific settings designed for chat instructions do not influence the "Review uncommitted changes" feature, which operates more broadly at the repository level.

While direct referencing isn't supported, the community offered practical workarounds to help teams maintain their desired coding standards and enhance software development productivity metrics:

• Merge All Instructions: The most straightforward solution is to consolidate all your custom instructions into the single .github/copilot-instructions.md file. To maintain readability and organization, you can use clear headers to separate rules for different languages, file types, or specific review aspects. For example:

  # General Review Guidelines
  
  # TypeScript Specific Rules
  // ... TypeScript style guide rules ...
  
  # Python Specific Rules
  // ... Python style guide rules ...
  
  # Security Best Practices
  // ... Security-related review points ...

• Leverage Inline Code Comments: For highly specific, file-level guidance that might be too verbose for the main instructions file, consider using inline comments directly within your code. While not a Copilot instruction per se, these comments can serve as explicit reminders for human reviewers and context for AI tools.

This insight underscores the importance of understanding the current capabilities and limitations of AI-powered developer tools. As GitHub Copilot continues to evolve, features for more flexible instruction management will likely emerge, further streamlining software project development workflows. For now, consolidating instructions and utilizing clear organizational structures within the single supported file remains the most effective strategy for tailoring Copilot's code review feedback.