<< All versions

Skill v1.0.0

currentAutomated scan100/100
bighardperson/computer-science-skills-collection/autoresearch
──Details
PublishedSeptember 30, 2026 at 12:33 PM
Content Hashsha256:6bf73ef65e3b0ccf...
Git SHAe9f99fd7fed5
──Files
Files (1 file, 8.8 KB)
SKILL.md8.8 KBactive
SKILL.md · 264 lines · 8.8 KB

name: autoresearch description: Run Karpathy-style autoresearch optimization on any content. Generates 50+ variants, scores with a 5-expert simulated panel, evolves winners through multiple rounds, outputs optimized version + full experiment log. Use when optimizing landing pages, email sequences, ad copy, headlines, form pages, CTA text, or any conversion-focused content. Triggers on "optimize this page", "run autoresearch", "score these variants", "A/B test this copy". description_zh: "Karpathy 风格内容优化,50+ 变体 + 专家评分 + 进化迭代" description_en: "Karpathy-style content optimization with 50+ variants, expert scoring, and evolution" version: 1.0.0 homepage: https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills


Autoresearch Skill

Karpathy-style optimization loops for any conversion-focused content. No traffic needed. Simulated expert panel. Minutes, not weeks.

When to use this: Pre-launch content optimization. Generate 50+ variants, score with 5 simulated experts, evolve winners, output the best version + full experiment log.

When NOT to use this: Post-launch real-traffic A/B testing — that requires real analytics, not simulated scoring.

The sequence: Run autoresearch FIRST to hit 85+ simulated score. Then deploy. Then validate with real traffic.

What You'll Produce

Every run outputs 3 files:

FilePurpose
{name}-optimized.{ext}The winning optimized content
data/{name}-experiments.jsonFull experiment log — all variants + all scores
data/{name}-optimization-report.mdHuman-readable summary with winner rationale

Expert Panel (5 Personas)

Score every variant against all 5. Batch all variants into a single API call per round.

#PersonaScoring Lens
1CMO at a mid-market B2B company (50M+ revenue)"Would this make me stop and engage?"
2Skeptical founder"Do I believe this? Would I trust this company?"
3Conversion rate optimizer"Is this clear, specific, and action-driving?"
4Senior copywriter"Is this compelling, differentiated, and well-crafted?"
5Your CEO/founder"Direct, ROI-obsessed, no BS. Would I put this on my site?"
Customization: Replace persona #5 with your own CEO/founder voice. Define their priorities and communication style in a references/founder-voice.md file.

Each judge scores 0–100. Final score = average across all 5 judges.


Round Structure (Per Content Element)

Round 1:
→ Generate 10 variants of the element
→ Batch-score all 10 with the 5-expert panel (1 API call)
→ Rank by average score
→ Keep top 3
Round 2 (Evolution):
→ Analyze what the top 3 did right
→ Generate 10 new variants that push those winning patterns further
→ Batch-score all 10 (1 API call)
→ Keep top 3
Round 3 (If score < threshold):
→ Identify weakest scoring dimension
→ Generate 10 variants optimized for that dimension
→ Batch-score → keep top 1
Multi-element cross-breeding:
→ Take top 1 winner from each element
→ Generate 5 combinations that mix winning elements
→ Score holistically as complete units
→ Output the single best combination

Stop condition: Top variant hits minimum score threshold (default: 80) OR 3 rounds complete.


Content Types & Score Dimensions

Landing Pages

Elements to optimize: Hero headline, subheadline, CTA text, problem section, social proof

Score dimensions:

  • first_impression — Does it grab immediately?
  • clarity — Is the offer instantly understood?
  • trust — Does it feel credible?
  • urgency — Is there a reason to act now?
  • would_convert — Would the judge actually click?

Email Sequences

Elements to optimize: Subject line, opening line, body copy, CTA, PS line

Score dimensions:

  • would_open — Subject line pass rate
  • would_read — Does the opening hook?
  • would_click — Is the CTA compelling?
  • would_reply — Does it feel personal enough to respond to?
  • spam_risk — Does it feel spammy? (lower = better; invert for final score)

Ad Copy

Elements to optimize: Headline, description, CTA

Score dimensions:

  • scroll_stopping — Does it interrupt the scroll?
  • clarity — Is the value prop clear in 3 seconds?
  • click_worthiness — Does the judge want to click?
  • relevance — Does it match likely audience intent?
  • differentiation — Does it stand out from competitors?

Form Pages

Elements to optimize: Headline, subtext, value prop bullets, button text, field order, thank-you copy

Score dimensions:

  • first_impression — Does it feel worth filling out?
  • trust — Do they believe their info is safe and the offer is real?
  • completion_likelihood — Would the judge start filling it out?
  • lead_quality — Would this attract serious prospects (not tire-kickers)?
  • would_fill_out — Final gut check: would they submit?

Step-by-Step Execution Protocol

Step 1: Intake & Parse

Read the source content. Identify content type automatically or confirm with user:

  • HTML file → landing page or form page
  • Markdown / plain text → email or ad copy
  • If ambiguous, ask: "Is this a landing page, email sequence, ad copy, or form page?"

Extract all optimizable elements. List them back to user:

Found 5 elements to optimize:
1. Hero headline: "We help B2B companies grow"
2. Subheadline: "Full-service digital marketing..."
3. CTA: "Get Started"
4. Problem statement: [excerpt]
5. Social proof: [excerpt]
Optimizing: all | Variants per round: 10 | Min score: 80

Step 2: Get API Key

Check for Anthropic API key: $ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable.

bash
export ANTHROPIC_API_KEY="your-api-key-here"

Step 3: Run Optimization Rounds

For each element, run the round structure above.

Critical API efficiency rule: ALWAYS batch all variants into a single prompt. Never call the API once per variant. A round with 10 variants = 1 API call.

Model preference (in order):

  1. claude-sonnet-4-5 (preferred — fast + smart)
  2. claude-opus-4 (if highest quality needed)
  3. Any claude-3.5+ model if the above aren't available

Step 4: Cross-Breed (Multi-Element)

After all elements have winners:

  1. Assemble the top winner from each element into a complete unit
  2. Generate 5 holistic variants that naturally combine the winning elements
  3. Score the complete units (not just individual parts)
  4. Pick the winner with the highest holistic score

Step 5: Write Output Files

bash
# Create output directory
mkdir -p data
# Write optimized content
# Write experiments JSON
# Write optimization report

Experiments JSON structure:

json
{
"run_id": "autoresearch-{name}-{timestamp}",
"content_type": "landing_page",
"source_file": "path/to/original",
"min_score_threshold": 80,
"rounds": [
{
"round": 1,
"element": "hero_headline",
"variants": [
{
"id": 1,
"text": "...",
"scores": {
"cmo": 72,
"skeptical_founder": 68,
"cro": 75,
"copywriter": 70,
"founder": 65
},
"avg_score": 70
}
],
"top_3": [1, 4, 7],
"winner_score": 82
}
],
"final_winner": {
"hero_headline": "...",
"subheadline": "...",
"cta": "...",
"holistic_score": 87
}
}

Step 6: Report Back

Summarize results to user:

  • Final winning score
  • Biggest score jump (which element improved most)
  • Top 2 runner-up alternatives (in case winner doesn't feel right)
  • Path to all 3 output files
  • Clear next step

User Options

OptionDefaultDescription
elementsallWhich elements to optimize
variants_per_round10How many variants to generate per round
min_score80Stop when this score is hit
rounds3Max rounds before stopping
auto_applyfalseWhether to overwrite the source file with winners
content_typeauto-detectForce a content type if auto-detect is wrong

Quality Gates

  • < 70: Don't ship. Something fundamental is broken.
  • 70-79: Marginal. One more round targeting the lowest-scoring dimension.
  • 80-84: Good. Shippable. Validate with real traffic.
  • 85-89: Strong. Ship with confidence.
  • 90+: Rare. Ship immediately.

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

  • Never call the API once per variant. Always batch. A 10-variant round = 1 call.
  • Don't over-optimize for one dimension. If you're hitting 95 on clarity but 45 on trust, the overall score is misleading.
  • Don't run more than 5 rounds. If you're not hitting 80 after 3 rounds, the problem is strategic (wrong positioning), not tactical (wrong words).
  • Don't cross-breed until each element has its own winner. Premature cross-breeding creates incoherent combinations.
All versions