If you're working with AgentScript, you may run into a frustrating situation: the agent doesn't compile, but Agentforce Builder gives you a generic error message.
Sometimes the Problems tab in the new Builder shows an error, but it doesn't give you enough information to understand what went wrong.
There are a few ways to approach debugging. This is the workflow I currently use.
1. VS Code + Salesforce DX Extensions
If you're developing AgentScript in VS Code, the Salesforce DX extensions provide syntax checking directly in the editor.
Syntax issues are highlighted as you work, so VS Code is a good first place to check when something doesn't compile.
It's fast feedback and often enough to spot an obvious syntax issue before doing anything else.
2. Salesforce CLI validation
When VS Code doesn't give you enough information, I use Salesforce CLI validation.
Run:
sf agent validate authoring-bundle
The CLI will prompt you to select the AiAuthoringBundle you want to validate.
If validation fails, the output includes: the syntax error, a short description of the error, the relevant line number in the AgentScript file.
For me, this is currently the most reliable way to validate AgentScript syntax.
The useful part is that the CLI points you to the actual location of the problem instead of just telling you that the agent failed to compile.
3. Agentforce Builder AI Assistant
There is also another option directly in Agentforce Builder: the built-in AI assistant.
You can ask it to review your AgentScript. It can identify syntax errors and also suggest improvements to the code.
However, I wouldn't rely on it as the only validation method. There is no guarantee that it will find every syntax error, and its suggestions quality can vary.
My current workflow
When an AgentScript agent doesn't compile, I usually go through these three steps:
VS Code → quick feedback and syntax highlighting
Salesforce CLI → reliable validation and specific error locations
Builder AI Assistant → additional review and suggestions
Using all three together has been much more effective than relying on a single validation method.
Top comments (0)