autoresearch-agent
Autonomous experiment loop that optimizes any file by a measurable metric. Inspired by Karpathy's autoresearch. The agent edits a target file, runs a fixed evaluation, keeps improvements (git commit), discards failures (git reset), and loops indefinitely. Use when: user wants to optimize code speed, reduce bundle/image size, improve test pass rate, optimize prompts, improve content quality (headlines, copy, CTR), or run any measurable improvement loop. Requires: a target file, an evaluation command that outputs a metric, and a git repo.
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-05-02
- Stars
- ★ 3
- Forks
- 1
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- autoresearch-agent
- license
- MIT
- metadata
- { "author": "Alireza Rezvani", "updated": 1773360000000, "version": "2.0.0", "category": "engineering" }
- description
- Autonomous experiment loop that optimizes any file by a measurable metric. Inspired by Karpathy's autoresearch. The agent edits a target file, runs a fixed evaluation, keeps improvements (git commit), discards failures (git reset), and loops indefinitely. Use when: user wants to optimize code speed, reduce bundle/image size, improve test pass rate, optimize prompts, improve content quality (headlines, copy, CTR), or run any measurable improvement loop. Requires: a target file, an evaluation command that outputs a metric, and a git repo.
03 SKILL.md 正文
Autoresearch Agent
You sleep. The agent experiments. You wake up to results.
Autonomous experiment loop inspired by Karpathy's autoresearch. The agent edits one file, runs a fixed evaluation, keeps improvements, discards failures, and loops indefinitely.
Not one guess — fifty measured attempts, compounding.
Slash Commands
| Command | What it does |
|---|---|
/ar:setup |
Set up a new experiment interactively |
/ar:run |
Run a single experiment iteration |
/ar:loop |
Start autonomous loop with configurable interval (10m, 1h, daily, weekly, monthly) |
/ar:status |
Show dashboard and results |
/ar:resume |
Resume a paused experiment |
When This Skill Activates
Recognize these patterns from the user:
- "Make this faster / smaller / better"
- "Optimize [file] for [metric]"
- "Improve my [headlines / copy / prompts]"
- "Run experiments overnight"
- "I want to get [metric] from X to Y"
- Any request involving: optimize, benchmark, improve, experiment loop, autoresearch
If the user describes a target file + a way to measure success → this skill applies.
Setup
First Time — Create the Experiment
Run the setup script. The user decides where experiments live:
Project-level (inside repo, git-tracked, shareable with team):
python scripts/setup_experiment.py \
--domain engineering \
--name api-speed \
--target src/api/search.py \
--eval "pytest bench.py --tb=no -q" \
--metric p50_ms \
--direction lower \
--scope project
User-level (personal, in ~/.autoresearch/):
python scripts/setup_experiment.py \
--domain marketing \
--name medium-ctr \
--target content/titles.md \
--eval "python evaluate.py" \
--metric ctr_score \
--direction higher \
--evaluator llm_judge_content \
--scope user
The --scope flag determines where .autoresearch/ lives:
project(default) →.autoresearch/in the repo root. Experiment definitions are git-tracked. Results are gitignored.user→~/.autoresearch/in the home directory. Everything is personal.
What Setup Creates
.autoresearch/
├── config.yaml ← Global settings
├── .gitignore ← Ignores results.tsv, *.log
└── {domain}/{experiment-name}/
├── program.md ← Objectives, constraints, strategy
├── config.cfg ← Target, eval cmd, metric, direction
├── results.tsv ← Experiment log (gitignored)
└── evaluate.py ← Evaluation script (if --evaluator used)
results.tsv columns: commit | metric | status | description
commit— short git hashmetric— float value or "N/A" for crashesstatus— keep | discard | crashdescription— what changed or why it crashed
Domains
| Domain | Use Cases |
|---|---|
engineering |
Code speed, memory, bundle size, test pass rate, build time |
marketing |
Headlines, social copy, email subjects, ad copy, engagement |
content |
Article structure, SEO descriptions, readability, CTR |
prompts |
System prompts, chatbot tone, agent instructions |
custom |
Anything else with a measurable metric |
If program.md Already Exists
The user may have written their own program.md. If found in the experiment directory, read it. It overrides the template. Only ask for what's missing.
Agent Protocol
You are the loop. The scripts handle setup and evaluation — you handle the creative work.
Before Starting
- Read
.autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/config.cfgto get:target— the file you editevaluate_cmd— the command that measures your changesmetric— the metric name to look for in eval outputmetric_direction— "lower" or "higher" is bettertime_budget_minutes— max time per evaluation
- Read
program.mdfor strategy, constraints, and what you can/cannot change - Read
results.tsvfor experiment history (columns: commit, metric, status, description) - Checkout the experiment branch:
git checkout autoresearch/{domain}/{name}
Each Iteration
- Review results.tsv — what worked? What failed? What hasn't been tried?
- Decide ONE change to the target file. One variable per experiment.
- Edit the target file
- Commit:
git add {target} && git commit -m "experiment: {description}" - Evaluate:
python scripts/run_experiment.py --experiment {domain}/{name} --single - Read the output — it prints KEEP, DISCARD, or CRASH with the metric value
- Go to step 1
What the Script Handles (you don't)
- Running the eval command with timeout
- Parsing the metric from eval output
- Comparing to previous best
- Reverting the commit on failure (
git reset --hard HEAD~1) - Logging the result to results.tsv
Starting an Experiment
# Single iteration (the agent calls this repeatedly)
python scripts/run_experiment.py --experiment engineering/api-speed --single
# Dry run (test setup before starting)
python scripts/run_experiment.py --experiment engineering/api-speed --dry-run
Strategy Escalation
- Runs 1-5: Low-hanging fruit (obvious improvements, simple optimizations)
- Runs 6-15: Systematic exploration (vary one parameter at a time)
- Runs 16-30: Structural changes (algorithm swaps, architecture shifts)
- Runs 30+: Radical experiments (completely different approaches)
- If no improvement in 20+ runs: update program.md Strategy section
Self-Improvement
After every 10 experiments, review results.tsv for patterns. Update the Strategy section of program.md with what you learned (e.g., "caching changes consistently improve by 5-10%", "refactoring attempts never improve the metric"). Future iterations benefit from this accumulated knowledge.
Stopping
- Run until interrupted by the user, context limit reached, or goal in program.md is met
- Before stopping: ensure results.tsv is up to date
- On context limit: the next session can resume — results.tsv and git log persist
Rules
- One change per experiment. Don't change 5 things at once. You won't know what worked.
- Simplicity criterion. A small improvement that adds ugly complexity is not worth it. Equal performance with simpler code is a win. Removing code that gets same results is the best outcome.
- Never modify the evaluator.
evaluate.pyis the ground truth. Modifying it invalidates all comparisons. Hard stop if you catch yourself doing this. - Timeout. If a run exceeds 2.5× the time budget, kill it and treat as crash.
- Crash handling. If it's a typo or missing import, fix and re-run. If the idea is fundamentally broken, revert, log "crash", move on. 5 consecutive crashes → pause and alert.
- No new dependencies. Only use what's already available in the project.
Evaluators
Ready-to-use evaluation scripts. Copied into the experiment directory during setup with --evaluator.
Free Evaluators (no API cost)
| Evaluator | Metric | Use Case |
|---|---|---|
benchmark_speed |
p50_ms (lower) |
Function/API execution time |
benchmark_size |
size_bytes (lower) |
File, bundle, Docker image size |
test_pass_rate |
pass_rate (higher) |
Test suite pass percentage |
build_speed |
build_seconds (lower) |
Build/compile/Docker build time |
memory_usage |
peak_mb (lower) |
Peak memory during execution |
LLM Judge Evaluators (uses your subscription)
| Evaluator | Metric | Use Case |
|---|---|---|
llm_judge_content |
ctr_score 0-10 (higher) |
Headlines, titles, descriptions |
llm_judge_prompt |
quality_score 0-100 (higher) |
System prompts, agent instructions |
llm_judge_copy |
engagement_score 0-10 (higher) |
Social posts, ad copy, emails |
LLM judges call the CLI tool the user is already running (Claude, Codex, Gemini). The evaluation prompt is locked inside evaluate.py — the agent cannot modify it. This prevents the agent from gaming its own evaluator.
The user's existing subscription covers the cost:
- Claude Code Max → unlimited Claude calls for evaluation
- Codex CLI (ChatGPT Pro) → unlimited Codex calls
- Gemini CLI (free tier) → free evaluation calls
Custom Evaluators
If no built-in evaluator fits, the user writes their own evaluate.py. Only requirement: it must print metric_name: value to stdout.
#!/usr/bin/env python3
# My custom evaluator — DO NOT MODIFY after experiment starts
import subprocess
result = subprocess.run(["my-benchmark", "--json"], capture_output=True, text=True)
# Parse and output
print(f"my_metric: {parse_score(result.stdout)}")
Viewing Results
# Single experiment
python scripts/log_results.py --experiment engineering/api-speed
# All experiments in a domain
python scripts/log_results.py --domain engineering
# Cross-experiment dashboard
python scripts/log_results.py --dashboard
# Export formats
python scripts/log_results.py --experiment engineering/api-speed --format csv --output results.csv
python scripts/log_results.py --experiment engineering/api-speed --format markdown --output results.md
python scripts/log_results.py --dashboard --format markdown --output dashboard.md
Dashboard Output
DOMAIN EXPERIMENT RUNS KEPT BEST Δ FROM START STATUS
engineering api-speed 47 14 185ms -76.9% active
engineering bundle-size 23 8 412KB -58.3% paused
marketing medium-ctr 31 11 8.4/10 +68.0% active
prompts support-tone 15 6 82/100 +46.4% done
Export Formats
- TSV — default, tab-separated (compatible with spreadsheets)
- CSV — comma-separated, with proper quoting
- Markdown — formatted table, readable in GitHub/docs
Proactive Triggers
Flag these without being asked:
- No evaluation command works → Test it before starting the loop. Run once, verify output.
- Target file not in git →
git init && git add . && git commit -m 'initial'first. - Metric direction unclear → Ask: is lower or higher better? Must know before starting.
- Time budget too short → If eval takes longer than budget, every run crashes.
- Agent modifying evaluate.py → Hard stop. This invalidates all comparisons.
- 5 consecutive crashes → Pause the loop. Alert the user. Don't keep burning cycles.
- No improvement in 20+ runs → Suggest changing strategy in program.md or trying a different approach.
Installation
One-liner (any tool)
git clone https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills.git
cp -r claude-skills/engineering/autoresearch-agent ~/.claude/skills/
Multi-tool install
./scripts/convert.sh --skill autoresearch-agent --tool codex|gemini|cursor|windsurf|openclaw
OpenClaw
clawhub install cs-autoresearch-agent
Related Skills
- self-improving-agent — improves an agent's own memory/rules over time. NOT for structured experiment loops.
- senior-ml-engineer — ML architecture decisions. Complementary — use for initial design, then autoresearch for optimization.
- tdd-guide — test-driven development. Complementary — tests can be the evaluation function.
- skill-security-auditor — audit skills before publishing. NOT for optimization loops.
04 同仓库更多 Skills
zarr-python
Chunked N-D arrays for cloud storage. Compressed arrays, parallel I/O, S3/GCS integration, NumPy/Dask/Xarray compatible, for large-scale scientific computing pipelines.
zabbix
Zabbix monitoring system automation via API and Python. Use when: (1) Managing hosts, templates, items, triggers, or host groups, (2) Automating monitoring configuration, (3) Sending data via Zabbix trapper/sender, (4) Querying historical data or events, (5) Bulk operations on Zabbix objects, (6) Maintenance window management, (7) User/permission management
x-twitter-growth
X/Twitter growth engine for building audience, crafting viral content, and analyzing engagement. Use when the user wants to grow on X/Twitter, write tweets or threads, analyze their X profile, research competitors on X, plan a posting strategy, or optimize engagement. Complements social-content (generic multi-platform) with X-specific depth: algorithm mechanics, thread engineering, reply strategy, profile optimization, and competitive intelligence via web search.
what-if-oracle
Run structured What-If scenario analysis with multi-branch possibility exploration. Use this skill when the user asks speculative questions like "what if...", "what would happen if...", "what are the possibilities", "explore scenarios", "scenario analysis", "possibility space", "what could go wrong", "best case / worst case", "risk analysis", "contingency planning", "strategic options", or any question about uncertain futures. Also trigger when the user faces a fork-in-the-road decision, wants to stress-test an idea, or needs to think through consequences before committing.
vercel-react-best-practices
React and Next.js performance optimization guidelines from Vercel Engineering. This skill should be used when writing, reviewing, or refactoring React/Next.js code to ensure optimal performance patterns. Triggers on tasks involving React components, Next.js pages, data fetching, bundle optimization, or performance improvements.
venue-templates
Access comprehensive LaTeX templates, formatting requirements, and submission guidelines for major scientific publication venues (Nature, Science, PLOS, IEEE, ACM), academic conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, CVPR, CHI), research posters, and grant proposals (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA). This skill should be used when preparing manuscripts for journal submission, conference papers, research posters, or grant proposals and need venue-specific formatting requirements and templates.