بنقرة واحدة
resume
Resume a paused experiment. Checkout the experiment branch, read results history, continue iterating.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
القائمة
Resume a paused experiment. Checkout the experiment branch, read results history, continue iterating.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
25 advanced engineering agent skills and plugins for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, OpenClaw. Agent design, RAG, MCP servers, CI/CD, database design, observability, security auditing, release management, platform ops.
Security audit and vulnerability scanner for AI agent skills before installation. Use when: (1) evaluating a skill from an untrusted source, (2) auditing a skill directory or git repo URL for malicious code, (3) pre-install security gate for Claude Code plugins, OpenClaw skills, or Codex skills, (4) scanning Python scripts for dangerous patterns like os.system, eval, subprocess, network exfiltration, (5) detecting prompt injection in SKILL.md files, (6) checking dependency supply chain risks, (7) verifying file system access stays within skill boundaries. Triggers: "audit this skill", "is this skill safe", "scan skill for security", "check skill before install", "skill security check", "skill vulnerability scan".
10 product agent skills and plugins for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, OpenClaw. PM toolkit (RICE), agile PO, product strategist (OKR), UX researcher, UI design system, competitive teardown, landing page generator, SaaS scaffolder, research summarizer. Python tools (stdlib-only).
Reverse-engineer any codebase into a complete Product Requirements Document (PRD). Analyzes routes, components, state management, API integrations, and user interactions to produce business-readable documentation detailed enough for engineers or AI agents to fully reconstruct every page and endpoint. Works with frontend frameworks (React, Vue, Angular, Svelte, Next.js, Nuxt), backend frameworks (NestJS, Django, Express, FastAPI), and fullstack applications. Trigger when users mention: generate PRD, reverse-engineer requirements, code to documentation, extract product specs from code, document page logic, analyze page fields and interactions, create a functional inventory, write requirements from an existing codebase, document API endpoints, or analyze backend routes.
Multi-agent collaboration plugin that spawns N parallel subagents competing on the same task via git worktree isolation. Agents work independently, results are evaluated by metric or LLM judge, and the best branch is merged. Use when: user wants multiple approaches tried in parallel — code optimization, content variation, research exploration, or any task that benefits from parallel competition. Requires: a git repo.
Read, write, and browse the AgentHub message board for agent coordination.
| name | resume |
| description | Resume a paused experiment. Checkout the experiment branch, read results history, continue iterating. |
| command | /ar:resume |
Resume a paused or context-limited experiment. Reads all history and continues where you left off.
/ar:resume # List experiments, let user pick
/ar:resume engineering/api-speed # Resume specific experiment
If no experiment specified:
python {skill_path}/scripts/setup_experiment.py --list
Show status for each (active/paused/done based on results.tsv age). Let user pick.
# Checkout the experiment branch
git checkout autoresearch/{domain}/{name}
# Read config
cat .autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/config.cfg
# Read strategy
cat .autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/program.md
# Read full results history
cat .autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/results.tsv
# Read recent git log for the branch
git log --oneline -20
Summarize for the user:
Resuming: engineering/api-speed
Target: src/api/search.py
Metric: p50_ms (lower is better)
Experiments: 23 total — 8 kept, 12 discarded, 3 crashed
Best: 185ms (-42% from baseline of 320ms)
Last experiment: "added response caching" → KEEP (185ms)
Recent patterns:
- Caching changes: 3 kept, 1 discarded (consistently helpful)
- Algorithm changes: 2 discarded, 1 crashed (high risk, low reward so far)
- I/O optimization: 2 kept (promising direction)
How would you like to continue?
1. Single iteration (/ar:run) — I'll make one change and evaluate
2. Start a loop (/ar:loop) — Autonomous with scheduled interval
3. Just show me the results — I'll review and decide
If the user picks loop, hand off to /ar:loop with the experiment pre-selected.
If single, hand off to /ar:run.