Explore Code
Rigor Improve implementation leaf skill for auditable candidate implementation in deep learning research repositories. Use when the researcher explicitly authorizes exploratory work on an isolated branch or worktree to transplant modules, adapt a backbone, add LoRA or adapter layers, replace a head, or stitch together meaningful low-risk migration ideas with rollback-aware records in `explore_out…
Install
$ agentstack add skill-lllllllama-rigorpilot-skills-explore-code ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Links to your public security report.[](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-lllllllama-rigorpilot-skills-explore-code) Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
explore-code
Use this as the Rigor Improve implementation leaf skill. The installed slug remains explore-code for compatibility.
Use the shared operating principles in ../ai-research-reproduction/references/agent-operating-principles.md; this skill should guide bounded candidate code work without over-prescribing implementation details.
When to apply
- When the researcher explicitly authorizes exploratory code changes on an isolated branch or worktree.
- When the task is source-anchored module transplant, backbone adaptation, LoRA or adapter insertion, or low-risk module combination.
- When summary-level recording is sufficient and the result is a candidate, not a trusted conclusion.
When not to apply
- When the request is for trusted baseline work, conservative debugging, or normal training execution.
- When the user did not explicitly authorize exploratory modifications.
- When the task is a broad refactor or a from-scratch idea implementation.
Clear boundaries
- This skill owns exploratory code modifications only.
- It must keep work isolated from the trusted baseline.
- Use
ai-research-exploreinstead when the task spans both current_research coordination and exploratory runs. - It may hand off execution to
minimal-run-and-auditorrun-train. - It should favor source-anchored copying and minimal adaptation over freeform rewrites.
- It should record why a candidate change is meaningful, how to roll it back,
and why it remains a candidate rather than a verified contribution.
Output expectations
explore_outputs/CHANGESET.mdexplore_outputs/SCIENTIFIC_CHANGELOG.mdexplore_outputs/COMPARABILITY_REPORT.mdexplore_outputs/TOP_RUNS.mdexplore_outputs/status.json
Notes
Use references/explore-policy.md, ../ai-research-reproduction/references/research-rigor-principles.md, scripts/plan_code_changes.py, and scripts/write_outputs.py.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: lllllllama
- Source: lllllllama/RigorPilot-Skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.