codex-research-os

Installs and operates a repo-native autonomous research organization with specialist agents, claim ledgers, and review gates.

Updated Jun 30, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Codeseys-Labs/agentic-sdlc --skill codex-research-os-codeseys-labs
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: codex-research-os
Source: https://github.com/Codeseys-Labs/agentic-sdlc/tree/main/plugin/skills/codex-research-os
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Codeseys-Labs/agentic-sdlc --skill codex-research-os-codeseys-labs

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? Running disciplined, multi-session research inside a repository is hard: claims get promoted without evidence, negative results are lost, novelty is asserted without prior-art checks, and agent roles approve their own work. This Skill scaffolds a portable research operating system into any repo — a director, 17 specialist roles, persistent ledgers, workflows, and strict review gates — so research progress is tracked, auditable, and resumable across sessions. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Conservative installer: scripts/install_research_os.py scaffolds the research tree (claims ledger, experiment registry, literature notes, workflows, Makefile gates) without overwriting existing project files, with --dry-run preview and digest-based ownership tracking. - Specialist agent roster: 17 narrow roles (literature scout, theorist, experimentalist, adversarial reviewer, replication reviewer, synthesis writer, and more) with enforced role boundaries so no agent approves its own work. - Evidence discipline: an evidence ladder from idea to formally proved, mandatory invariants (no improvement claim without a baseline, no novelty claim without novelty review, negative results retained), and make review-gates / make validate-claims checks before synthesis. - Use Case: Point it at an existing ML codebase to run a brownfield loop: map the repo, reproduce the baseline, run the cheapest decisive experiment, pass replication and adversarial review, and record the promoted claim with its evidence in research/claims/claims.yaml. ## Quick Start Ask the agent to install the research operating system into your target repository and run one research loop, for example: "Use codex-research-os to install the research OS into /path/to/my-repo and run the first brownfield loop."

Frequently Asked Questions about codex-research-os

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I install a research operating system into an existing repository?

Run the installer with an explicit target: `mise run research-os:install -- --target /path/to/repo --project-name "Name"`. It creates missing files only, skips existing ones, and refuses to run without a target. Use `--dry-run` to preview and `--force` only to intentionally replace generated files.

How do I run a research loop on an existing codebase or paper?

Use the brownfield loop in `research/workflows/brownfield_loop.md`: map the repo, reproduce or define a baseline, inventory claims conservatively, run the cheapest decisive experiment, then pass replication and adversarial review before updating claims and the next-action state.

Does the research OS depend on a specific AI provider or orchestrator?

No. It is deliberately repo-native and provider-neutral, with no dependency on external orchestrators. Generated roles omit static model pins; the conductor supplies a certified RuntimeAssignment with an exact model ID before any spawn, and unresolved assignments stop before dispatch.

What prevents agents from promoting unsupported research claims?

Mandatory invariants block promotion without evidence: no improvement claim without a baseline, no novelty claim without novelty review, no empirical promotion without replication review. `make review-gates`, `make validate-claims`, and `make validate-experiments` enforce these before final synthesis.

What are the limitations of the shipped review gate?

The shipped gate substring-matches free-text evidence fields written by the claim's own author, so honest caveats like "replication pending" can satisfy it. The typed-obligations design in `references/claim-obligations.md` fixes this with record-based resolution, but is documented as designed, not yet built.