Hello again FRED78,
So here is an article from August 2024=>Skeleton Method / SOLIDWORKS
And maybe this one =>Reddit - Dive into anything
Good luck, @+.
AR.
Yes I think I know the author of the first topic 
, I started this post hoping to find the solution to this problem
For the second one, I'm going to read it.
We use both methods at home.
Mainly the pilot sketch in the assembly with external references (all parts being virtualized to avoid having assemblies driven by another assembly: problem of updating external references during copies).
The part inserted into a part is more for the remachining of a casting part: at least we know exactly what we are doing. Parts with raw/machined configuration by managing the removal of functions often go to a peanut if the designer does not have a very good command of his creation tree (this is often the case during subsequent modifications to the part).
For the internal parts I'm not a fan.
But if the method and the follow-up is strict and integrated into the customs 
I don't have this possibility on my side (SW2022 SP5.0). To add relationships and freeze the sketch, you need to edit the function that uses it and manipulate the sketch. But there is no longer any possibility of going back after recording.
In any case, I completely agree with you:
Hello
It is possible to make an update, it implies a modification of the sketch. I'm not sure that changing a call number works, because they are already there. By adding a line, for example, it should work. To test there I don't have time but I'll look.
We have been offered to block sketch and function changes in parts directly, via the block bar. But I think it's a mistake, it prevents updates, which means acting on all the parts with each modification.
In conclusion, I prefer my skeleton 
method or working on Inventor, much more stable, less error from the software or the user. I'm changing tack 
Hello
If you start not using a function anymore because it bugs, you can directly change the software...
The art of the Solidworks designer is to deal with the multiple bugs and more or less reliable functions of this software.
In practice for your subject, everything works but there is a possibility to edit a sketch imported from a part (hole in the racket from SW) IF you directly use the sketch of the imported part in a function.
→ You forbid your team to directly use the sketch of the imported part in a function and you force them to go through an intermediate sketch with ' convert entities ': it's stable and bug-free so a good workaround.
Hello Froussel
Yes, you forbid, but you can't pass on in an uncertain future, and you can't always be behind.
But hey, software and bugs become the norm, and frankly we pay for a software for which we report work that should already be done. It is clearly recognized that today companies no longer bother testing their software, releasing a version every two years. No, they make a version every year, marketing obliges, and you test for them...
You want a reliable Catia software, it's not the same price, you want a less expensive SolidWorks software but you have the bugs.
Today, telephone, pc, games, CAD, etc... Companies work the same, you do their jobs, well part of it because I don't know their constraints.
In practice I do with an external skeleton, and external references. Easier and safer in every way. It's good to do it on inventor without any problem but I don't have a bug, graphics and other. However, I am a loyal Catia/SolidWorks customer. But they ended up doing just that, to the detriment of the profession. And I join my managers sometimes the automatic side is fed up with autocad 2D
It must be said quickly anyway 
Yes, in fact the definition of software has become " Buggy program with some features ".