experiment-runner
Skill1 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when executing an iterative experimentation loop — reads program.md, creates a session branch, proposes changes to a target file, measures results, and commits only improvements that pass a consistency check. Can be used standalone or via autoresearch.
- Deletes or force-pushes
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- wangyi0403/dl-research-workflowtheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- MOUCHILI-tech/miroswarmtheir own version, first seen May 8, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- wangyi0403/dl-research-workflow★ 4same name
- MOUCHILI-tech/miroswarm★ 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 repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- autoresearchSkill
- chrome-devtoolsSkill
- playwright-browserSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- save-knowledgeSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- sp-plan-discoverySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 35
Measure: run scripts/measure.sh, capture numeric output
- Very specific: line 39
Run the full consistency suite (e.g., npm test, pytest, make test)
- Very specific: line 40
If passes: commit to session branch + update baseline in experiments.md
- Distinctive: line 65
Stop the loop when any of these are true:
≈ “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
experiment-runner
Execution engine for iterative experimentation. Creates a clean session branch, loops through experiments, commits only what works.
Prerequisites
Before starting:
program.mdexists in the project directory (useautoresearchto create it)scripts/measure.shis adapted to your domain (must return a single numeric value to stdout)- Git repo has a clean working tree (
git statusshows nothing to commit)
Session Setup
./scripts/create-session-branch.sh
# Creates: autoresearch/session-YYYY-MM-DD
# Main branch is never touched during the loopVerify:
git branch --show-current
# Expected: autoresearch/session-YYYY-MM-DDOne Iteration (repeat until stop condition)
- Read
program.md— understand current hypothesis and constraints - Propose one change to the target file — smallest coherent modification
- Measure: run
scripts/measure.sh, capture numeric output - Compare result vs current baseline:
If result > baseline:
- Run the full consistency suite (e.g.,
npm test,pytest,make test) - If passes: commit to session branch + update baseline in
experiments.md - If fails:
git checkout . && git clean -fd→ log as POSITIVE-INCONSISTENT
If result <= baseline:
git checkout . && git clean -fd- Log as DISCARDED
experiments.md Log Format
Maintain experiments.md in the project directory. Append one entry per iteration:
## Iteration N — YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
**Change:** [one-line description of what was modified]
**Result:** [numeric metric value]
**Baseline at time:** [baseline value before this iteration]
**Delta:** [result - baseline, with sign]
**Outcome:** KEPT / DISCARDED / POSITIVE-INCONSISTENT
**Commit:** [short hash if KEPT, — otherwise]
**Notes:** [optional — why consistency failed, what was surprising]Stop Conditions
Stop the loop when any of these are true:
- Metric reaches the target defined in
program.md - Max iterations reached
- 5 consecutive DISCARDED results → pause, report to user, ask: continue / change strategy / stop
After the Session
The session branch contains only successful + consistent commits. Give the user these options:
# Option A: Squash all experiments into one commit on main
git checkout main
git merge --squash autoresearch/session-YYYY-MM-DD
git commit -m "feat: autoresearch improvements [N experiments, +X metric]"
# Option B: Cherry-pick specific experiments
git cherry-pick <hash1> <hash2>
# Option C: Discard everything
git branch -D autoresearch/session-YYYY-MM-DDDoes 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.

