Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

autoresearch(自动研究)

autoresearch 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

autoresearch 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 42,706。

总安装 1,048周安装 45GitHub Stars 2,174下载 367核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:autoresearch(自动研究)
来源仓库:https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills
仓库路径:skills/autoresearch
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills --skill autoresearch
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills --skill autoresearch

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

autoresearch 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词或任务场景快速定位候选结果时使用。它支持预发布内容优化,可生成大量变体并通过模拟专家评分迭代优化,输出最佳版本及完整实验日志。

使用时需先运行 autoresearch 达到 85 分以上模拟评分,再部署验证真实流量效果,避免将模拟结果直接当作最终结论。

安装命令为 npx skills add https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills --skill autoresearch,建议确认权限与维护状态。注意该技能可能触发联网、命令执行或文件读写,需评估安全风险后再使用。

来源仓库内路径:skills/autoresearch

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills --skill autoresea…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要接触敏感数据,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

autoresearch 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/ericosiu/ai-marketing-skills --skill autoresearch。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

autoresearch 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

autoresearch 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

autoresearch 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

autoresearch 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,048 次,近一周安装 45 次,下载 367 次,GitHub 2,174 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

autoresearch 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 来源仓库有 2,174 星,维护活跃度相对可查。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
autoresearch

自动研究 · 本页

1,0482,174接触敏感数据未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

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.

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

# Create output directory
mkdir -p data

# Write optimized content
# Write experiments JSON
# Write optimization report

Experiments JSON structure:

{
  "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.

平台分布

Codex

34.28%
按下载量换算126

Claude

31.88%
按下载量换算117

Cursor

16.93%
按下载量换算62

Gemini CLI

8.73%
按下载量换算32

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills