Mode d’emploi
- Copiez la commande et examinez le paquet avant de l’installer dans votre environnement agent.
- Consultez le document original pour les outils, identifiants et environnements requis.
- Décrivez les entrées et le livrable souhaité ; comparez la sortie aux sources.
npx skills add https://github.com/terrylica/cc-skills --skill crucible-navigatorAvant de commencer
- L’installation n’inclut ni abonnement au modèle, ni quota API, ni accès aux fichiers.
- Étoiles et installations reflètent l’activité, pas un test indépendant de qualité ou de sécurité.
Document Skill original
Rendu depuis le dépôt source en conservant titres, exemples, code, tableaux, liens et images.
crucible-navigator — Research campaign orientation
Self-Evolving Skill: This skill improves through use. If the routing guidance is wrong (wrong skill invoked for a user intent), fix the description's TRIGGERS list and the routing table below. Append reason to references/evolution-log.md. Don't defer.What this skill does
You are orienting an agent to research methodology. Route the agent to the right sub-skill based on what kind of research task is at hand. The four sub-skills cover epistemics (A), execution (B), decisions (C), and archive (D).
Routing table — map user intent to skill
| User intent signal | Route to |
|---|---|
| "Is this finding real?", "check significance", "shuffled null", "causal feature", "label leakage" | a-research-foundations |
| "Test a hypothesis", "sweep parameters", "multi-agent analysis", "gate validation", "per-trade analysis" | b-investigation-methodology |
| "Should we pivot?", "ship this?", "kill or refine?", "too much context", "supersede a finding" | c-meta-governance |
| "Check dormant ideas", "what's archived?", "resurrect this", "conditions have changed" | d-emergent-resurrection |
If unsure, start with A (foundations). Epistemic discipline is the hardest prerequisite.
The core genetic-evolutionary framing
Research in this plugin is treated as a population under selection:
Population ───────────> (multi-lens agents propose candidates)
│
▼
Fitness ──────────────> (z-score vs shuffled null, OOS replication, kill-selectivity)
│
▼
Selection ────────────> (serial adversarial gates A→B→C→D→E)
│
▼
Surviving individuals ─> (champion stacked as supersedes chain in evolution.jsonl)
│
▼
Mutation/Crossover ───> (agent proposes perturbations of winner; orthogonal components recombined)
│
▼
Archive failures ─────> (d-emergent-resurrection preserves with resurrect_if conditions)
│
└──────── NEXT GENERATION ───────┐
▼
(new audit folder)A "hypothesis" is a triple: (trigger, filter_cascade, management_rule). Each component mutates independently. Crossover combines validated components from different campaigns. Failed individuals go to archive, not trash.
Reading order for a new campaign
- Read this file. Understand the genetic framing.
- Read `a-research-foundations/SKILL.md`. 6 epistemic disciplines.
- Read `b-investigation-methodology/SKILL.md`. 6 execution patterns. This is the workhorse.
- Reference `c-meta-governance/SKILL.md` as needed during pivots/decisions.
- Check `d-emergent-resurrection/SKILL.md` first if the hypothesis resembles an archived dead one — you might be resurrecting.
Anti-patterns
- Treating principles as universal from N=1 evidence. Each principle has a
confirmation_count; defer to re-confirmed ones. - Skipping A. Experienced agents skip epistemics — don't. The label-leakage trap, wrong-null trap, and agent-z overstatement trap all live in A.
- Running a new campaign without checking D. Ideas recur. Check archive before re-exploring.
- Writing conclusions without ledger entries. See A5 (record-keeping-discipline).
Repository landmarks
In research-lab-repo/:
findings/methodology/— original 10 principle files (pre-plugin)findings/evolution/evolution.jsonl— ledger of findings (append-only)findings/evolution/audits/— dated audit folders (one per campaign)findings/evolution/audits/CLAUDE.md— audit index
When you're done in a session
Update references/evolution-log.md if you noticed that:
- The routing table missed a user intent (add the row)
- A TRIGGER keyword didn't fire on a relevant prompt (extend the description)
- A sub-skill was weaker than expected (flag it for refinement)
Post-Execution Reflection
After invoking this skill, if the routing produced a wrong-skill-selected outcome, or if a new user-intent pattern emerged that isn't covered:
- Identify the gap. What did the user ask for that wasn't routed?
- Determine the fix. Add a new row to the routing table? Add keywords to TRIGGERS? New sub-skill needed?
- Apply the fix. Edit this file in-place. Append to
references/evolution-log.mdwith: date, trigger text, what was changed, and link to the session where this came up. - Never silently defer. A quiet gap is worse than a noisy one.
