Auto-Evolve v4.4 (build 57fe0d7)
Four-perspective automated inspection and iteration manager.
Make your projects continuously better — automatically.
Core Philosophy
auto-evolve is not just a code scanner — it's a巡检伙伴 that thinks like a human.
On each scan, auto-evolve simulates receiving a Feishu message:
"What else can this project improve? Any shortcomings?"
It then examines the project from four perspectives, forming real opinions — not mechanically listing issues.
Scan Workflow (v4.0)
auto-evolve scan
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Step 1: project-standard project type detection │
│ Detects: Skill / CLI / Python Library / Web / ... │
│ Determines perspective weights + inspection focus │
└─────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Step 2: Four-perspective inspection │
│ │
│ 👤 USER → user/user-perspective.md (criteria) │
│ 📦 PRODUCT → product-requirements.md (criteria) │
│ 🏗 PROJECT → project-inspection.md (criteria) │
│ ⚙️ TECH → code-standards.md (criteria) │
└─────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Step 3: project-standard reference docs │
│ Used as evaluation criteria, output grouped report │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Step 4: Execute / Notify / Record to learnings │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Relationship with project-standard
| Component | Role |
|---|---|
| project-standard | Defines taxonomy + four-perspective framework + reference docs (judging criteria) |
| auto-evolve | Loads standards, runs inspection, records learnings, executes improvements |
Four-Perspective Framework
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ auto-evolve Inspection Framework v4.0 │
├──────────────┬──────────────────┬───────────────────┤
│ User │ Product │ Project │ Tech │
│ "Usable?" │ "Delivered?" │ "Healthy?" │ "Clean?" │
├──────────────┼──────────────────┼───────────────────┼──────────────────┤
│ CLI design │ Feature complete │ Learnings closed │ Code quality │
│ Learning │ Promise kept │ Scan history │ Architecture │
│ Errors │ Pain resolved │ Config rational │ Test coverage │
│ Fault tol. │ Docs match code │ Dependency health│ Performance │
└──────────────┴──────────────────┴───────────────────┴──────────────────┘Four Perspectives Detail
👤 User Perspective
Core question: Is it pleasant to use?
| Ask | Finds |
|---|---|
| CLI design | Non-intuitive flags, missing defaults |
| Learning curve | How long for a newcomer? |
| Error messages | Machine-speak vs human-speak |
| Fault tolerance | What on partial failure? |
| Workflow | Steps per operation? |
📦 Product Perspective
Core question: Does it deliver what it promises?
| Ask | Finds |
|---|---|
| README promises | Features claimed but not built |
| Pain points | ❌-marked issues still broken |
| Feature completeness | Half-baked features |
| Docs consistency | Docs ≠ code |
🏗 Project Perspective
Core question: Is it managed well?
| Ask | Finds |
|---|---|
| Learnings loop | Previous findings tracked? |
| Scan rhythm | Regular schedule? |
| Config rationality | Over/under-configured? |
| Dependency health | Outdated deps? Known CVEs? |
⚙️ Tech Perspective
Core question: Is the code healthy?
| Ask | Finds |
|---|---|
| Code quality | Duplicates, long functions |
| Architecture | Module coupling |
| Test coverage | Core logic tested? |
| Performance/security | Bottlenecks, vulnerabilities |
Note: Tech is the lowest priority — it's important but should not overshadow product truth.
Scan Output Format
🔍 auto-evolve Inspection Report — soul-force
Generated: 2026-04-05 22:30
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
👤 User Perspective ★★★★★
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1. 🚨 Impact 0.7
review command lacks --dry-run, users think it's safe but it writes files
→ Suggestion: Add --dry-run support to review
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
📦 Product Perspective ★★★★
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1. 🚨 Impact 0.8
README promises "LLM fallback" but code has no fallback
API failure = tool failure
→ Suggestion: Implement keyword-based rule engine as fallback
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
⚙️ Tech Perspective ★★
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[opt] 🟡 duplicate_code: SoulForgeConfig init repeated 15 timesCommands
scan
# Scan all configured repos
python3 auto-evolve.py scan
# Single repo scan
python3 auto-evolve.py scan --repo /path/to/repo
# Preview mode (no execution)
python3 auto-evolve.py scan --dry-run
# With specific persona memory
python3 auto-evolve.py scan --recall-persona masterconfirm / reject / approve
python3 auto-evolve.py confirm
python3 auto-evolve.py reject 2 --reason "too risky"
python3 auto-evolve.py approve 1,3repo-add / repo-list
python3 auto-evolve.py repo-add ~/.openclaw/workspace/skills/hawk-bridge --type skill
python3 auto-evolve.py repo-listschedule
python3 auto-evolve.py schedule --every 168
python3 auto-evolve.py schedule --suggestlearnings
python3 auto-evolve.py learnings
python3 auto-evolve.py learnings --type rejections
python3 auto-evolve.py learnings --summary # v4.3: summary viewtrends (v4.3)
python3 auto-evolve.py trends --repo soul-force # Scan trend for a project
python3 auto-evolve.py trends --all # All projectsConfiguration
~/.auto-evolverc.json
{
"mode": "semi-auto",
"full_auto_rules": {
"execute_low_risk": true,
"execute_medium_risk": false,
"execute_high_risk": false
},
"schedule_interval_hours": 168,
"repositories": [
{
"path": "/path/to/repo",
"type": "skill",
"visibility": "public",
"auto_monitor": true
}
]
}LLM Integration
auto-evolve uses OpenClaw-configured LLM (no separate API key needed).
Priority: OPENAI_API_KEY / MINIMAX_API_KEY env vars, or openclaw config get llm.
Iteration Storage
.auto-evolve/
.iterations/
{id}/
manifest.json -- metadata + findings
plan.md -- execution plan
pending-review.json -- items pending review
report.md -- execution report
metrics.json -- iteration metrics
.learnings/
approvals.json -- approved changes
rejections.json -- rejected changes + reasons