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
- Gaurav890/everything-agentic-engineeringtheir own version, first seen Sep 13, 2026
- MarchRory/liushi_agent_settingstheir own version, first seen Jun 1, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- Gaurav890/everything-agentic-engineering★ 1same name
- MarchRory/liushi_agent_settings★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository125 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .cursor/rules/agent-loom-routing.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/agent-loom-skills-index.mdcCursor rule
- adversarial-hatSkill
- agent-builderSkill
- agent-launcherSkill
- agent-loom-syncSkill
- agent-observabilitySkill
- agent-run-retroSkill
- agent-system-architectureSkill
- api-and-interface-designSkill
- api-deprecation-and-migrationSkill
- apply-paper-to-projectSkill
- app-security-hardeningSkill
- architectural-decision-logSkill
- assumption-mappingSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- browser-testing-with-devtoolsSkill
- business-modelingSkill
- ci-cd-and-automationSkill
- codebase-understandingSkill
- code-review-crspSkill
- code-simplificationSkill
- compress-skillSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- create-agent-promptSkill
- cross-link-skillsSkill
- customer-discoverySkill
- debug-and-fixSkill
- deep-thinkingSkill
- dependency-mappingSkill
- deploy-anywhereSkill
- deprecate-skillSkill
- design-directionSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-systemSkill
- dynamic-routingSkill
- eval-judgeSkill
- eval-outputSkill
- eval-pipelineSkill
- eval-rubric-designSkill
- experimentationSkill
- experiment-backlogSkill
- experiment-readoutSkill
- experiment-runbookSkill
- experiment-specSkill
- fault-localizeSkill
- feature-specSkill
- fermiSkill
- first-principlesSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- generate-changelogSkill
- git-workflow-and-versioningSkill
- gsap-animationSkill
- harness-engineeringSkill
- harness-generationSkill
- idea-evaluationSkill
- idea-generationSkill
- implementation-planSkill
- improve-skillsSkill
- The first 60 shown.
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
- Distinctive: line 34
Never run an evolution round without harness vN manifest and operational eval harness.
- Distinctive: line 35
Never propose an edit without trace evidence tied to a failure cluster.
- Distinctive: line 36
Never accept an edit without regression gate: held-in Δ ≥ 0 AND held-out Δ ≥ 0 AND max(Δ) > 0 (Self-Harness).
- Distinctive: line 37
Never make outcome-only edits — attribute failure to an ETCLOVG layer first (HarnessFix).
- Very specific: line 38
Never allow evolve agent to modify verifier config, eval held-out tasks, or LLM API keys (AHE sandbox).
- Very specific: line 39
Never promote prompt-only changes when tools/middleware/skills are the diagnosed layer (AHE ablation).
- Very specific: line 40
Never bypass file-scope guard — edits only to paths declared in manifest allowed_write.
- Very specific: line 76
Write docs/harness/evolve/change_manifest.json before evaluation.
≈ “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
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:
docs/harness/manifest.jsonexists (else →harness-generation).docs/harness/eval-interface.md+ regression task set defined (else →eval-rubric-design→eval-pipeline).- 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_writepaths (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.
| Gate | Rule |
| Self-Harness acceptance | held-in Δ ≥ 0 AND held-out Δ ≥ 0 AND improvement > 0 |
| Scope | No files outside allowed_write |
| No-change | Zero file changes → inherit parent scores, do not promote (metaharness) |
| pass@1 | Optimize 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_taskspredicted 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
| Excuse | Reality |
| "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 storereferences/diagnosis-etclovg.md— HTIR nodes, layer attribution, flaw recordsreferences/examples.md— accept, reject, and RHO fallback examples
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.

