-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
docs: compare agentic campaigns to GitHub Security Campaigns #9363
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Co-authored-by: mnkiefer <[email protected]>
|
@copilot: The following will only work for Enterprise customers? |
Co-authored-by: mnkiefer <[email protected]>
Yes, that's correct. The REST API for creating GitHub Security Campaigns requires GitHub Enterprise Cloud. I've added a note in commit 031ddc4 to clarify this requirement in the integration example section. |
Updated terminology to consistently refer to 'GitHub Agentic Campaigns' throughout the document.
|
@copilot: Make sure the newly created docs and concise and clear, do not repeat or bloat. |
Co-authored-by: mnkiefer <[email protected]>
Streamlined the documentation in commit 6bb2e8f, reducing from 285 to 65 lines (77% reduction). Removed:
All essential information is retained in a clear, concise format. |
Clarify the term 'agentic campaigns' by adding 'GitHub' to the description.
Completed: Compare Agentic Campaigns to GitHub Security Campaigns
Summary
Created concise comparison documentation between GitHub Agentic Workflows campaigns and GitHub's Security Campaigns feature.
Reduced from 285 to 65 lines (77% reduction) to improve clarity and remove redundancy while maintaining all essential information.
The streamlined document includes:
The document follows GitHub Docs voice and Astro Starlight best practices, emphasizing conciseness and clarity.
Original prompt
💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.