well, only in the sense that one could play having very few trade/craft skills and simply run Beginner's Luck tests until having learned enough about that skill OR run Nature tests until becoming overly taxed. So, yes, using a skill for a purposeful intent is worthy of a test; and no, using a skill to demonstrate having that skill is not a purposeful test. As a GM, I can allow players wide latitude for describing the implementation of skills in trades or crafts without requiring dice to hit the table and outlining the risk of failure. In fact, that's much of how a player would narrate a Helper support--that is, they describe the use of their supporting skill without rolling a die to determine whether they actually implement the skill. Also, those Helper offers can be limited in scope or effectiveness while a test of the skill could be more definitive at the risk of Success w/ Condition or Twist.
Originally Posted by MouseGuardianOfTheGalaxy
So, it's true of all trade/craft skills as well as true for Abilities and social skills, or other skills. The key in respect to performance is whether that added value of separate instruments (including voice and dance) generates improved gameplay. If by chance you are running a campaign of performers and intend to use those performances for facing obstacles, that would be a case in which homebrewed skills to reflect the instruments of performance (or at least a performance skill) may provide added value. If the case is one member of the patrol takes interest in performing, that is better reflected by gear and wises with a healthy dose of Orator.
-- The Guard Prevail --