agentleFS
dvy1987dvy1987/agent-loom/.agents/skills/harness-evolution/SKILL.md

harness-evolution

Skill4 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Improve agent reliability over time — diagnose why agents fail and fix the setup. Triggers on: agent keeps failing, same mistake again, agent not improving, make agent smarter, agent quality plateau, agents ignore skills, agent skips tests, fix agent behavior, agent unreliable, improve agent setup, self-improving harness, agents worse over time, tune agent instructions, agent going in circles, agent ignores AGENTS.md, repeated agent errors. Requires harness v0 and eval harness. AUTO-ROUTED from harness-engineering on symptoms. Not first setup — harness-generation first.

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 4 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.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Never run an evolution round without harness vN manifest and operational eval harness.

    line 34
  2. Distinctive:

    Never propose an edit without trace evidence tied to a failure cluster.

    line 35
  3. Distinctive:

    Never accept an edit without regression gate: held-in Δ ≥ 0 AND held-out Δ ≥ 0 AND max(Δ) > 0 (Self-Harness).

    line 36
  4. Distinctive:

    Never make outcome-only edits — attribute failure to an ETCLOVG layer first (HarnessFix).

    line 37
  5. Very specific:

    Never allow evolve agent to modify verifier config, eval held-out tasks, or LLM API keys (AHE sandbox).

    line 38
  6. Very specific:

    Never promote prompt-only changes when tools/middleware/skills are the diagnosed layer (AHE ablation).

    line 39
  7. Very specific:

    Never bypass file-scope guard — edits only to paths declared in manifest allowed_write.

    line 40
  8. Very specific:

    Write docs/harness/evolve/change_manifest.json before evaluation.

    line 76

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Harness Evolution

You close the harness improvement loop: execute → trace → diagnose layer → propose minimal edit → regression validate → promote or reject. Model weights are out of scope.

Hard Rules

Never run an evolution round without harness vN manifest and operational eval harness. Never propose an edit without trace evidence tied to a failure cluster. Never accept an edit without regression gate: held-in Δ ≥ 0 AND held-out Δ ≥ 0 AND max(Δ) > 0 (Self-Harness). Never make outcome-only edits — attribute failure to an ETCLOVG layer first (HarnessFix). Never allow evolve agent to modify verifier config, eval held-out tasks, or LLM API keys (AHE sandbox). Never promote prompt-only changes when tools/middleware/skills are the diagnosed layer (AHE ablation). Never bypass file-scope guard — edits only to paths declared in manifest allowed_write.


Workflow

Step 0 — Preconditions (mandatory)

Verify:

  1. docs/harness/manifest.json exists (else → harness-generation).
  2. docs/harness/eval-interface.md + regression task set defined (else → eval-rubric-design → eval-pipeline).
  3. Held-out split documented — never fed to proposer (Self-Harness, Meta-Harness).

FAIL fast with specific route if any missing.

Step 1 — Capture traces

Collect from: benchmark runs, docs/memory/agent-handoffs.md, session logs, or docs/harness/runs/iteration_NNN/. Distill to layered digest per AHE experience observability — raw millions of tokens are not fed to the proposer.

Step 2 — Diagnose (ETCLOVG + HTIR)

Per references/diagnosis-etclovg.md:

  • Normalize traces to step-level nodes (HarnessFix HTIR pattern).
  • Attribute each failure cluster to one primary layer: Execution, Tooling, Context, Lifecycle, Observability, Verification, Governance.
  • Consolidate recurring flaws into actionable records — one mechanism per record.

Step 3 — Propose diverse-minimal candidates

Generate K candidate edits (default K=3), each:

  • Tied to one failure mechanism (Self-Harness).
  • Scoped to manifest allowed_write paths (metaharness scope guard).
  • Documented with evidence quad (AHE): failure evidence, root cause, targeted fix, predicted impact.

Write docs/harness/evolve/change_manifest.json before evaluation.

Step 4 — Regression validate

Invoke eval-pipeline (harness regression mode) on held-in + held-out splits.

GateRule
Self-Harness acceptanceheld-in Δ ≥ 0 AND held-out Δ ≥ 0 AND improvement > 0
ScopeNo files outside allowed_write
No-changeZero file changes → inherit parent scores, do not promote (metaharness)
pass@1Optimize pass@1, not pass@k flaky strategies (AHE)

Step 5 — Promote or reject

Accept: bump manifest version to vN+1, update hashes, archive run under docs/harness/runs/. Reject: log predicted-vs-actual in manifest; if same flaw persists 2+ rounds at same layer → rollback component and pivot layer (AHE).

Optional label-free path (RHO): when no labeled eval exists, use self-consistency + pairwise self-preference among candidates — still require positive mean score before promote.

Step 6 — Memory + handoff

On promote: memory-capture with harness version, delta metrics, and changed components. Append docs/skill-outputs/SKILL-OUTPUTS.md.


Gotchas

  • Compressed feedback loses credit assignment — never reduce traces to scalar score only (Meta-Harness).
  • Runtime supervision patches suppress errors without fixing harness flaws — reject as edits (HarnessFix).
  • Self-attribution misses regressions — manifest must list risk_tasks predicted to break (AHE).
  • Generic prompt bloat — every instruction must map to a diagnosed failure cluster.
  • Label-free RHO is fallback — prefer verifier-backed regression when labels exist.

Output Format

Harness evolution — round [N]
Diagnosed layer: [ETCLOVG]
Candidates: [K] | Accepted: [id or none]
Held-in Δ: [x] | Held-out Δ: [y]
Promoted: v[N] → v[N+1] | [rejected — reason]
Changed components: [list]
Next: [another round | reality-check claim audit]

Example

<examples> <example> <input>Agent keeps retrying the same failing tool call — improve the harness.</input> <output> Harness evolution — round 1 Diagnosed layer: Tooling (F6 tool-use loop) Candidates: 3 | Accepted: candidate-2 (middleware retry cap + alternate tool path) Held-in Δ: +2 | Held-out Δ: +1 Promoted: v0 → v1 | Changed: docs/harness/middleware.md, tool descriptions </output> </example> </examples>

Common Rationalizations

ExcuseReality
"Skip eval — vibes say it's better"No regression gate = unfalsifiable (reality-check)
"Fix in the prompt only"AHE: prompt-only regresses; fix diagnosed layer
"Use test failures as held-out"Contaminates proposer — splits are sacred
"One big harness rewrite"Diverse-minimal proposals beat monolithic edits
"Evolve without manifest"No attribution, no rollback

Verification

  • Preconditions verified (manifest + eval harness + held-out split)
  • Failure attributed to ETCLOVG layer with trace refs
  • change_manifest.json with evidence quad
  • Regression run via eval-pipeline
  • Promotion only if dual-split rule passes

Red Flags

  • Evolution round without eval harness
  • Held-out tasks leaked to proposer
  • Scope violations in edited files
  • Prompt bloat without failure mapping

Prune Log

Last pruned: 2026-07-05

  • Deep learn-from: evolution-loop, diagnosis-etclovg, examples L3 (5 papers + 5 repos)

Impact Report

Harness evolution round [N]: [accepted|rejected]
Layer: [ETCLOVG] | v[N]→v[N+1]
Held-out Δ: [x] | Components changed: [list]
eval-pipeline: [run id]

Reference Files

  • references/evolution-loop.md — full loop, auto-harness 3-step gate, filesystem artifact store
  • references/diagnosis-etclovg.md — HTIR nodes, layer attribution, flaw records
  • references/examples.md — accept, reject, and RHO fallback examples

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.