autoresearch
Skill274 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Autonomous Goal-directed Iteration. Apply Karpathy's autoresearch principles to ANY task. Loops autonomously — modify, verify, keep/discard, repeat. Invoke with /skill:autoresearch or when user says "work autonomously", "iterate until done", "keep improving", or "run overnight".
100 other projects use a version of this, 5 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- thistleknot/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- WdBlink/autoresearch-papertheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- OpenLAIR/dr-clawtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- taixuann/development-spacetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- TidalPaladin/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- usecompai/compound-operations-modeltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use aeon-update, auto-workflow and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
aaronjmarsSkillaeon-update
Pull framework updates from the upstream Aeon repo into this instance - 3-way merges canon's new commits into a PR, never clobbering operator config.
Also in 4 projects that use this
aaronjmarsSkillauto-workflow
Two-mode aeon.yml workflow builder - analyze inspects URLs and emits a tiered, signal-verified skill-enablement plan plus an aeon.yml diff; enable flips slugs to enabled:true and opens a PR.
Also in 4 projects that use this
- +10 more from aaronjmars
Other versions100 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 5
- erigontech/erigon★ 3.6k53% same
- dominicletz/elixir-skills★ 3465% same
- Muminur/autoresearch-skill-Andrej-Karpathy★ 1618% same
- architect-4-citadell/elektra-skills★ 116% same
- ryanmaclean/skills★ 115% same
Wrote their own version · 95
- github/awesome-copilot★ 41ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claude-sisyphus★ 41ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode★ 41ksame name
- Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-codex★ 34ksame name
- AgriciDaniel/claude-obsidian★ 16ksame name
- Orchestra-Research/AI-research-SKILLs★ 13ksame name
- zechenzhangAGI/AI-research-SKILLs★ 13ksame name
- Orchestra-Research/AI-Research-SKILLs★ 12ksame name
- advaitpaliwal/feynman★ 10ksame name
- companion-inc/feynman★ 10ksame name
85 more not listed
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 repository22 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-browserSkill
- building-native-uiSkill
- expo-api-routesSkill
- expo-cicd-workflowsSkill
- expo-deploymentSkill
- expo-dev-clientSkill
- expo-tailwind-setupSkill
- expo-ui-jetpack-composeSkill
- expo-ui-swift-uiSkill
- just-bashSkill
- nano-bananaSkill
- native-data-fetchingSkill
- qa-device-managementSkill
- qa-scrollSkill
- qa-setupSkill
- qa-state-persistenceSkill
- qa-test-flowsSkill
- qa-webSkill
- slack-webSkill
- upgrading-expoSkill
- use-domSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 96 edited versions we read keep these.
8
Distinctive
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 21
Before touching any files, deeply understand the goal.
- Distinctive: line 44
Tailor questions to the specific goal: Don't ask about what's already clear.
- Very specific: line 116
Read references/autonomous-loop-protocol.md for full protocol details.
- Very specific: line 152
When Commander is available, autoresearch MUST track every iteration as a Commander task.
- Distinctive: line 156
After establishing the baseline and getting plan approval, create a Commander task group for this research session:
- Very specific: line 202
Note: Use complete for ALL outcomes (keep, discard, crash).
- Distinctive: line 206
Every 5 iterations, send a mailbox status update AND add a comment to the group:
- Distinctive: line 220
When the loop ends (bounded mode reaching N, or goal achieved):
- Distinctive: line 254
All Commander calls are optional.
- Distinctive: line 258
Never let a Commander error interrupt the autonomous loop
- Very specific: line 275
Every autoresearch session is saved to .context/research-sessions/<session-id>.json.
- Distinctive: line 280
Update the session file at every major transition: understand → plan → research → implement → complete.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 96 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Autoresearch — Autonomous Goal-directed Iteration
Inspired by Karpathy's autoresearch. Applies constraint-driven autonomous iteration to ANY work — not just ML research.
Core idea: You are an autonomous agent. Modify -> Verify -> Keep/Discard -> Repeat.
When to Activate
- User invokes
/skill:autoresearchor/autoresearch - User says "work autonomously", "iterate until done", "keep improving", "run overnight"
- Any task requiring repeated iteration cycles with measurable outcomes
Phase 1: Understand (Do This First — Before ANY Work)
Before touching any files, deeply understand the goal. Do NOT rush into iteration.
- Read relevant files — Scan the codebase to build context around the user's goal. Understand what exists, what patterns are in use, and what's realistic.
- Identify ambiguities — Based on the goal and codebase context, what's unclear?
- Is the success metric obvious or ambiguous?
- Is the scope (which files to modify) clear?
- Are there constraints the user hasn't mentioned?
- Are there multiple valid interpretations?
- Ask clarifying questions — If ANY ambiguity exists, use
ask_userto ask targeted questions:
Tailor questions to the specific goal. Don't ask about what's already clear. Ask about genuine ambiguities.ask_user { question: "I have a few questions before I build the research plan:", mode: "questions", options: [ { label: "1. What metric should define success? (e.g. test coverage %, build time ms, bundle size KB)" }, { label: "2. Which files/directories are in scope for modification?" }, { label: "3. Are there any approaches to avoid or constraints I should know about?" }, { label: "4. What does 'done' look like — a specific target, or iterate until interrupted?" } ] } - Skip if crystal clear — If the goal is unambiguous (clear metric, scope, exit criteria), skip questions and proceed to Phase 2. State briefly why no questions are needed.
- Synthesize understanding — Form a concrete statement: Goal, Metric (what + direction + verify command), Scope (in/out), Constraints, Exit criteria.
- Save research session — Create
.context/research-sessions/<session-id>.jsonwith the initial session data: goal, metric, scope, clarifying Q&A, status "understanding". Store thesession_idfor updates throughout the lifecycle.
Phase 2: Plan (Present Before Executing)
Now write and present a research plan for user approval. Do NOT start iterating without approval.
- Establish baseline — Run the verification command to get a starting metric value.
Write the research plan — Create
.context/autoresearch-plan.md:# Autoresearch Plan: <goal summary> ## Goal <Concrete goal statement> ## Metric - **Measuring:** <what> - **Direction:** <higher/lower is better> - **Verify command:** `<command>` - **Baseline:** <current value> - **Target:** <target value or "continuous improvement"> ## Scope - **In scope:** <files/directories to modify> - **Read only:** <files for context only> - **Out of scope:** <excluded areas> ## Strategy Ordered approaches, most to least promising: 1. <First approach — why promising> 2. <Second approach — what it explores> 3. <Third approach — alternative angle> 4. <Fourth approach — radical idea> 5. <Fifth approach — simplification play> ## Iteration Plan - **Mode:** <bounded (N) / unbounded> - **Estimated time per iteration:** <seconds/minutes> - **When stuck:** Re-read plan, combine near-misses, try opposites ## Exit Criteria - <When to stop>- Present for approval:
show_plan { file_path: ".context/autoresearch-plan.md", title: "Autoresearch Plan: <goal>" }- Approved → proceed to Phase 3
- Declined → revise based on feedback and re-present
- Update session — Set status to "planning", save plan content and baseline metric.
Phase 3: Setup & Begin
With understanding confirmed and plan approved, set up tracking and start.
- Create results log — Create
autoresearch-results.tsv(seereferences/results-logging.md) - Record baseline — Log the baseline metric from Phase 2 as iteration #0
- Commander tracking — If available, create task group and broadcast start (see Commander Integration below)
- Update session — Set status to "researching"
- Begin the loop — Start iterating immediately. No further confirmation needed.
The Loop
Read references/autonomous-loop-protocol.md for full protocol details.
LOOP (FOREVER or N times):
1. Review: Read current state + git history + results log
2. Ideate: Pick next change based on goal, past results, what hasn't been tried
3. Modify: Make ONE focused change to in-scope files
4. Commit: Git commit the change (before verification)
5. Verify: Run the mechanical metric (tests, build, benchmark, etc.)
6. Decide:
- IMPROVED -> Keep commit, log "keep", advance
- SAME/WORSE -> Git revert, log "discard"
- CRASHED -> Try to fix (max 3 attempts), else log "crash" and move on
7. Log: Record result in results log
8. Repeat: Go to step 1.
- If unbounded: NEVER STOP. NEVER ASK "should I continue?"
- If bounded (N): Stop after N iterations, print final summaryCritical Rules
- Loop until done — Unbounded: loop until interrupted. Bounded: loop N times then summarize.
- Read before write — Always understand full context before modifying
- One change per iteration — Atomic changes. If it breaks, you know exactly why
- Mechanical verification only — No subjective "looks good". Use metrics
- Automatic rollback — Failed changes revert instantly. No debates
- Simplicity wins — Equal results + less code = KEEP. Tiny improvement + ugly complexity = DISCARD
- Git is memory — Every kept change committed. Agent reads history to learn patterns
- When stuck, think harder — Re-read files, re-read goal AND
.context/autoresearch-plan.mdfor planned strategy, try next untried approach from the plan, combine near-misses, try radical changes. Don't ask for help unless truly blocked by missing access/permissions
Principles Reference
See references/core-principles.md for the 7 generalizable principles from autoresearch.
Commander Integration (Task Tracking & Visibility)
When Commander is available, autoresearch MUST track every iteration as a Commander task. This gives the dashboard full visibility into autonomous work — just like the tasks extension does for manual workflows.
Setup Phase (Phase 3) — Create Task Group
After establishing the baseline and getting plan approval, create a Commander task group for this research session:
commander_task {
operation: "group:create",
group_name: "Autoresearch: <goal summary>",
initiative_summary: "<full goal description with metric and scope>",
total_waves: 1,
working_directory: "<cwd>",
tasks: []
}Store the returned group_id — all iteration tasks will be added to this group.
Send an initial mailbox status broadcast:
commander_mailbox {
operation: "send",
from_agent: "autoresearch",
to_agent: "commander",
body: "Autoresearch started: <goal>. Baseline metric: <value>. Scope: <files>. Plan approved.",
message_type: "status"
}Per-Iteration — Create → Claim → Complete
Before modifying (step 3 of each loop iteration), create and claim a Commander task:
commander_task { operation: "create", description: "Iteration #N: <planned change>", working_directory: "<cwd>", group_id: <group_id> }
commander_task { operation: "claim", task_id: <task_id>, agent_name: "autoresearch" }After logging results (step 7 of each loop iteration), complete the task with the outcome:
commander_task { operation: "complete", task_id: <task_id>, result: "<status>: <description>. Metric: <old> → <new> (delta: <delta>)" }Also add a comment to the task with detailed results:
commander_task { operation: "comment:add", task_id: <task_id>, body: "Status: <keep|discard|crash>\nMetric: <value> (delta: <delta>)\nCommit: <hash or '-'>\nDescription: <what was tried>", agent_name: "autoresearch" }Note: Use complete for ALL outcomes (keep, discard, crash). Discards and crashes are expected in autoresearch — they're not failures. Reserve fail only for unrecoverable errors that halt the entire loop.
Status Broadcasts — Every ~5 Iterations
Every 5 iterations, send a mailbox status update AND add a comment to the group:
commander_mailbox {
operation: "send",
from_agent: "autoresearch",
to_agent: "commander",
body: "Autoresearch progress — Iteration #N: metric at <value> (baseline: <baseline>). Keeps: X | Discards: Y | Crashes: Z",
message_type: "status"
}Research Complete — Report & Implementation Handoff (MANDATORY)
When the loop ends (bounded mode reaching N, or goal achieved):
- Final mailbox broadcast with full summary:
commander_mailbox {
operation: "send",
from_agent: "autoresearch",
to_agent: "commander",
body: "Autoresearch complete (N iterations). Baseline: <X> → Final: <Y> (delta: <Z>). Keeps: A | Discards: B | Crashes: C. Best iteration: #M — <description>",
message_type: "result"
}- Compile findings & next steps — Extract prioritized, actionable implementation items from the research. Update the session file with findings, next steps array, and final metric.
- Research report — Present via
show_reportframed as a handoff:
show_report {
title: "Research Complete — Ready for Implementation: <goal>",
summary: "## Research Results\n\n...\n\n## Prioritized Next Steps\n\n1. <action item>\n2. ...\n\n## Recommended Implementation Approach\n\n<how to implement>"
}- Ask about implementation — Use
ask_userto offer three choices:- Implement now → spawn a team of builder agents via
subagent_create_batch - Save & pause → set session to "paused", resume later via
/research - Done → mark session "complete"
- Implement now → spawn a team of builder agents via
- Implementation (if chosen) — Update session to "implementing", create Commander task group, dispatch builders, track completion. When done, present final comprehensive report covering research results AND implementation work. Set session to "complete".
- Preserve the plan — Leave
.context/autoresearch-plan.mdintact. Leave the session file for browsing via/research.
Graceful Degradation
All Commander calls are optional. If Commander is unavailable:
- Skip
commander_taskandcommander_mailboxcalls silently - The local
autoresearch-results.tsvlog remains the primary record - The
show_reportcall still works (it only needs git, not Commander) - Never let a Commander error interrupt the autonomous loop
Adapting to Different Domains
| Domain | Metric | Scope | Verify Command |
| Backend code | Tests pass + coverage % | src/**/*.ts | npm test |
| Frontend UI | Lighthouse score | src/components/** | npx lighthouse |
| ML training | val_bpb / loss | train.py | uv run train.py |
| Blog/content | Word count + readability | content/*.md | Custom script |
| Performance | Benchmark time (ms) | Target files | npm run bench |
| Refactoring | Tests pass + LOC reduced | Target module | npm test && wc -l |
Adapt the loop to your domain. The PRINCIPLES are universal; the METRICS are domain-specific.
Session Persistence
Every autoresearch session is saved to .context/research-sessions/<session-id>.json. This enables:
- Resume later — pick up where you left off via
/researchcommand - Browse history — see all past research sessions in the research browser
- Track lifecycle — from understanding through implementation completion
Update the session file at every major transition: understand → plan → research → implement → complete. On every "keep" iteration or every ~5 iterations, append iteration data to the session. This creates a complete record of the research lifecycle that can be browsed and resumed.
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.

