auto-research — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited auto-research (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Autonomously runs a hypothesis→test→evaluate→keep/discard optimization loop on a target skill or CLAUDE.md. Three isolated sub-agents handle testing and evaluation — the main agent orchestrates and decides.
Produces: updated target skill file (SKILL.md or CLAUDE.md), iteration dashboard (markdown), entry appended to results.md.
Does not produce: new skills, research reports, publishing automation, or criteria for skills it has not been given.
Read references/learnings.md and summarise the 3 most relevant bullets for this run. Read the target skill file in full. If results.md exists, read the last run entry for this target.
Read references/criteria-framework.md.
Propose 3–5 candidate criteria for the target skill. For each criterion:
State the recommended iteration cap (5 for 1–2 criteria; 10 for 3+) and target pass rate (default 100%).
Wait for human approval. Human may approve, edit, or add criteria before the loop starts.
If any criterion cannot be expressed as a true/false binary, stop and ask the human to reformulate it before proceeding.
Generate a minimum of 5 diverse test inputs appropriate for the target skill. Write to harness/test-inputs.md.
This file is read-only for the remainder of the run. The loop may never modify it.
If 10 or more inputs are generated, designate the last 20% as the holdout validation set. Note the split at the top of harness/test-inputs.md.
Run the current unmodified target skill on the training inputs 5 times. Score every output against all approved criteria. Calculate baseline pass rate per criterion and overall.
Log to results.md:
## Run: [YYYY-MM-DD] — Target: [skill name or file path]
Criteria: [numbered list]
Baseline: [score per criterion] | Overall: [X/Y = Z%]
Iterations: [cap]
---Repeat until overall pass rate reaches target OR iteration cap is reached.
Propose one substantive change to a working copy of the skill (one variable, one change). State the expected mechanism of improvement. Small tweaks (whitespace, punctuation, trivial reordering) are not valid hypotheses.
Read agents/test-runner.md. Spawn it as a sub-agent with:
harness/test-inputs.md (training set only)Do not pass: the hypothesis text, experiment log, baseline score, or prior iteration context. Receive: raw outputs array, one per input.
For each output:
agents/eval-deterministic.md. Spawn as sub-agent with: the raw output + criterion definition.agents/eval-judge.md. Spawn as sub-agent with: the raw output + criterion definition + relevant reference files.Receive from each: {"criterion": "...", "result": "pass|fail", "evidence": "..."}.
Calculate pass rate for all criteria — not just the active hypothesis. Compare every criterion to the previous iteration.
Append to results.md:
Iteration [N]: [hypothesis one-liner] | Before: [scores] | After: [scores] | KEEP/REVERT | [one-line reasoning]If a holdout set exists: run the final working copy on holdout inputs and score against all criteria. Note any gap between training and holdout pass rates.
Read assets/dashboard-template.md. Produce the iteration dashboard using it.
Present to human:
Wait for human approval before writing to the original skill file.
On approval: write the final working copy to the original file path.
Ask: "Any corrections or patterns from this run I should learn from?"
Route the response:
| User says | Destination |
|---|---|
| Behavioral correction ("don't do X", "I prefer Y") | references/learnings.md |
| Factual exception ("format is actually Z") | references/edge-cases.md |
| "Never do X again" | Add rule to Step 3 above |
| Approval / "perfect" | Save dashboard to assets/approved-examples/ |
| No response / "looks good" | Do nothing |
Trim references/learnings.md at 80 lines (consolidate redundant entries); hard cap at 100. When a correction reveals a repeatable failure pattern, add a new case to evals/evals.json with a prompt that triggers it and an assertion that the corrected behaviour is present.
harness/test-inputs.md is written once in Step 2 and never modified by the loop<!-- Built with Agent Engineer Master — get your own production-ready skill: www.agentengineermaster.com/skill-engineer -->
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.