Look up any arxiv paper on alphaxiv.org to get a structured AI-generated overview. This is faster and more reliable than trying to read a raw PDF.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Coach the user through a rigorous, repository-grounded interview to create or improve program.md. Use when a target repository lacks program.md, its goals, metrics, data, or guardrails are unclear, or the user asks to be grilled about an autoresearch setup.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
查看安装方法安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Interview the user relentlessly until you reach a shared understanding. Map this as a design tree: every decision branches into the decisions that hang off it.
Before asking questions, inspect the repository's documentation, data loaders,
training and evaluation code, configuration, and any existing program.md.
Finding facts is your job, never the user's. Ask the user only for decisions
and intent.
Work the tree in rounds. The frontier is every decision whose prerequisites are already settled: the questions you can ask now without guessing at answers you have not heard yet. Ask the whole frontier in one round. Number each question, give your recommended answer, and then wait for the user's answers before the next round.
Format each question like this:
❓ **Q1** - **<question title>**: <question body, including choices when useful>
➡️ <your recommended answer>
Each round reshapes the tree. Settled decisions push the frontier outward and unblock dependent questions. Recompute the frontier and ask the next round. A question whose answer depends on another question still open in this round belongs to a later round.
When a frontier question needs a fact from the environment, dispatch a subagent to find it. Do not ask the user for anything you could look up yourself, and do not block the independent questions: a running investigation is only an unsettled prerequisite for its downstream branch. The decisions are the user's; put each to them and wait.
For program.md, keep the design tree centered on:
The session is done when the frontier is empty: every branch of the design tree has been visited and nothing material remains silently assumed. Do not act on it until the user confirms that you have reached a shared understanding.
Then draft a program.md that is concise, plain-language, and high-signal
because Senpai appends it to every model's system prompt. Make it specific
enough to run and evaluate the research correctly, while leaving implementation
choices and exploration to the research agents. Prefer high-level goals and
guardrails over step-by-step micromanagement, and verify every repository path,
command, data claim, and metric definition against the repository.
Useful examples:
Adapted from Matt Pocock's grilling skill, used under the MIT License.
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
Look up any arxiv paper on alphaxiv.org to get a structured AI-generated overview. This is faster and more reliable than trying to read a raw PDF.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Operator-side analysis of historical ML experiment PRs in Senpai research tracks. Use this skill whenever the user asks to: analyze experiments, categorize PRs, bucket experiments, summarize what's been tried, understand experiment history, review merged vs closed results, or asks "what experiments have we run / worked / failed". Also triggers for: "pull the latest experiments", "what's been tried so far", "category breakdown of PRs", "which experiments succeeded", "noam track analysis". When a branch name is mentioned (e.g. "noam branch", "on the noam branch"), pass it as the base branch to scope the fetch to just those PRs.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Create a typed assignment branch and draft PR for one student. Use when the advisor has a concrete hypothesis and the student has no open `status:wip` or `status:review` assignment.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Create or improve a Senpai target repository's program.md. Use this skill whenever the user wants to point Senpai at a fresh ML or research target repository, define the research objective, primary metric, benchmark contract, allowed edit boundaries, W&B reporting contract, or prepare a repo for autonomous advisor/student experiment loops.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Open GitHub Issues for human input and respond to the researcher team. Use this skill whenever you need to handle a human_issue event, respond to human issues, ask humans a question, or check team communications. Also triggers for: "any human messages?", "check issues", "respond to humans".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Check scientific progress and operational health of a Senpai research program against the mission in its target repository's program.md. Use for experiment updates, health checks, current advisor/student activity, promising or failed experiments, W&B/GitHub reconciliation, evaluation status, and next research priorities. Produce a fresh, read-only, evidence-backed report with clear implications and actions. Do not use for cluster-capacity-only checks or to mutate research state.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。