agentic-simulation
Skill1 starsChanged 16 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when researching, developing, inspecting, testing, or improving simulations with Antioch, including controllers, custom kernels, solver integration, parameter fitting, datasets, policy experiments, and failure analysis. Choose a bounded research, Jupyter, script, or recorded evaluation loop and verify it with measurements and images.
In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- antioch-platformSkill
- antioch-researchSkill
- isaac-lab-3Skill
- isaac-sim-6Skill
- ros2Skill
- scenario-designSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
Keep reusable code in project modules.
- Distinctive: line 26
After a timeout, inspect the existing operation before repeating side effects.
- Distinctive: line 30
Start from the question and the existing project.
- Distinctive: line 45
Keep the requested physical model.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Agentic simulation
Turn a simulation question into grounded knowledge, working code, or a measured result. Scale the work to the request: an answer needs no project, and a small script need not become a suite. Use Antioch platform for project and compute setup.
Choose an execution loop
| Work | Mechanism |
| Explore a scene, controller, or repeated trial | Jupyter kernel: keep Kit, scene, and variables alive between calls |
| Check a script from a clean process | antioch service exec -- python src/main.py |
| Save repeatable verdicts and compare cases | Scenarios and suites |
Keep reusable code in project modules. In Jupyter, edit locally, reload the module, and call it again. Inspect state and images before changing the next variable. A dispatched scenario starts a fresh process; try one case before expanding to a large batch so warm kernel state cannot hide missing setup. After a timeout, inspect the existing operation before repeating side effects.
Connect the task to the right tools
Start from the question and the existing project. Use research to find a compatible API or method, assets to reuse a robot or environment, and the Isaac Sim or Isaac Lab guide for the native implementation. Keep platform setup in Antioch platform.
For a custom kernel or solver integration, identify who owns each state array, its device and frame, and the order in which controls, forces, integration, and observations run. Test the coupled loop against a small known case. A Warp kernel compiling by itself does not prove it is called at the correct point in a Newton or Isaac step.
For parameter fitting, define the measured quantities and units, choose free parameters and plausible bounds, and save the baseline before searching. Hold out measurements for validation. Use cases and suites for independent comparisons and the Python client when an outer optimization loop needs to collect, submit, and read results.
For datasets, use data collection to define camera outputs, labels, variation, and writer behavior; inspect sample frames and annotations before scaling. For policies, use Lab environment authoring to establish observations, actions, resets, training, and evaluation. A saved run holds evidence, not a resumed simulator or training process.
Measure the result
Decide what proves success: images for appearance, body state and contacts for physical behavior, repeated cases for reliability. Read exceptions and measurements and inspect actual images. An exit code of zero proves neither physical correctness nor a passing evaluation.
Keep the requested physical model. Teleporting a robot, welding a payload, or disabling collisions changes what the experiment proves. Test coupled components together.
Retain useful code and evidence. Report what you wrote, what ran, what passed, and what remains unverified.
Further guidance
- For camera placement and inline images, load navigation and capture.
- For datasets, load data collection; for policies, load Isaac Lab.
- For a ROS 2 stack such as Nav2 or MoveIt 2 driving the simulated robot, load ROS 2.
- For research, assets, environment changes, or saved runs, choose the relevant platform guide.
Bound experiments by the question: start with one seed, a short simulated interval, and the outputs needed to diagnose it. Expand cases or training only after that probe works and the user has authorized the larger run. Simulation evidence supports the modeled conditions; it does not replace validation on the physical system.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

