engineering/autoresearch-agent/skills/resume/SKILL.md
Resume a paused experiment. Checkout the experiment branch, read results history, continue iterating.
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills resumeInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
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.
tools
Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.
tools
Use when planning, funding, scoping, or synthesizing enterprise research across workstreams — clinical study design, R&D program finance, market sizing/surveys, or product/user research. Triggers on "design this clinical study", "what sample size", "R&D budget", "burn rate", "capitalize or expense", "TAM SAM SOM", "market sizing", "survey design", "segment the market", "plan user interviews", "usability test", "synthesize research insights". Forks context to route to one of four Research-Operations sub-skills (clinical-research, research-finance, market-research, product-research) and returns a digest. Distinct from ra-qm-team (regulatory submission), finance (corporate close/valuation), research/grants (funding discovery), product-team (persona/journey/live experiments), and marketing-skill (campaign analytics).
development
Use when managing the money for an internal R&D program or portfolio — building a multi-period program budget with the F&A (indirect) split, tracking burn rate and runway against value-inflection milestones, or routing R&D cost items to a capitalize-vs-expense determination. Every budget output surfaces its assumptions block; capitalize-vs-expense is decision-support only and routes to a named finance owner — it never books an entry or decides accounting treatment. Distinct from finance/financial-analysis (corporate DCF, close, valuation) and research/grants (funding discovery — this manages money already won).
development
Use when planning and synthesizing product/user research as a method-and-repository discipline — selecting the right method for the goal (generative interviews vs usability test vs concept test vs validation), computing method-based saturation/sample size with an explicit confidence level, or synthesizing coded observations into insights while flagging single-source anecdotes. Never fabricates user insight; an insight requires recurrence across independent participants. Distinct from product-team/ux-researcher-designer (persona/journey artifacts), product-discovery (discovery-sprint planning), and experiment-designer (live A/B) — this is the research-ops method + insight-repository layer.