run▌
alirezarezvani/claude-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Run exactly ONE experiment iteration: review history, decide a change, edit, commit, evaluate.
/ar:run — Single Experiment Iteration
Run exactly ONE experiment iteration: review history, decide a change, edit, commit, evaluate.
Usage
/ar:run engineering/api-speed # Run one iteration
/ar:run # List experiments, let user pick
What It Does
Step 1: Resolve experiment
If no experiment specified, run python {skill_path}/scripts/setup_experiment.py --list and ask the user to pick.
Step 2: Load context
# Read experiment config
cat .autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/config.cfg
# Read strategy and constraints
cat .autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/program.md
# Read experiment history
cat .autoresearch/{domain}/{name}/results.tsv
# Checkout the experiment branch
git checkout autoresearch/{domain}/{name}
Step 3: Decide what to try
Review results.tsv:
- What changes were kept? What pattern do they share?
- What was discarded? Avoid repeating those approaches.
- What crashed? Understand why.
- How many runs so far? (Escalate strategy accordingly)
Strategy escalation:
- Runs 1-5: Low-hanging fruit (obvious improvements)
- Runs 6-15: Systematic exploration (vary one parameter)
- Runs 16-30: Structural changes (algorithm swaps)
- Runs 30+: Radical experiments (completely different approaches)
Step 4: Make ONE change
Edit only the target file specified in config.cfg. Change one thing. Keep it simple.
Step 5: Commit and evaluate
git add {target}
git commit -m "experiment: {short description of what changed}"
python {skill_path}/scripts/run_experiment.py \
--experiment {domain}/{name} --single
Step 6: Report result
Read the script output. Tell the user:
- KEEP: "Improvement! {metric}: {value} ({delta} from previous best)"
- DISCARD: "No improvement. {metric}: {value} vs best {best}. Reverted."
- CRASH: "Evaluation failed: {reason}. Reverted."
Step 7: Self-improvement check
After every 10th experiment (check results.tsv line count), update the Strategy section of program.md with patterns learned.
Rules
- ONE change per iteration. Don't change 5 things at once.
- NEVER modify the evaluator (evaluate.py). It's ground truth.
- Simplicity wins. Equal performance with simpler code is an improvement.
- No new dependencies.
How to use run on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add run
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches run from GitHub repository alirezarezvani/claude-skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate run. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /run) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.7★★★★★70 reviews- ★★★★★Anika Jain· Dec 20, 2024
run has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Isabella Torres· Dec 16, 2024
run fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Isabella Haddad· Dec 16, 2024
Keeps context tight: run is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Pratham Ware· Dec 12, 2024
run is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Valentina Ghosh· Dec 12, 2024
Registry listing for run matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Valentina Shah· Nov 15, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: run is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Noah Choi· Nov 11, 2024
run reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Diego Desai· Nov 7, 2024
Registry listing for run matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Tariq Garcia· Nov 7, 2024
run is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Nov 3, 2024
Keeps context tight: run is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
showing 1-10 of 70