📦 Rotifer Arena — Rotifer生态入口
v1.0.3Rotifer 生态入口——一键完成 Gene 对比评估全流程。从 ClawHub Skill、本地 Skill、已有 Gene 或从零创建,自动编排 wrap→compile→arena→报告。当用户提到「对比」「评估」「challenge」「竞争」「Arena 对抗」「跑分」「benchmark」等关键词时触发。
详细分析 ▾
运行时依赖
版本
添加前置要求部分,包含 CLI 和 MCP 设置说明(无硬编码版本)
安装命令
点击复制技能文档
One Skill covering Gene/Genome/Agent comparison across all scenarios.
Prerequisites
This Skill requires the Rotifer CLI:
npx @rotifer/playground --version
Or use the MCP Server for IDE integration:
{
"mcpServers": {
"rotifer": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@rotifer/mcp-server"]
}
}
}
Overview
This Skill wraps Rotifer Protocol's core value — objective, quantifiable capability evaluation — into a one-click workflow. Users don't need to understand Gene, Arena, or F(g) concepts upfront; the Skill introduces them naturally during execution.
Cross-platform: This SKILL.md runs in any AI development environment that supports Skills/Agents.
Workflow
Phase 1: Identify Evaluation Target
Understand user intent through conversation and determine the evaluation mode:
| User signal | Mode | Action |
|---|---|---|
| "Evaluate the X skill from ClawHub" | ClawHub migration evaluation | rotifer wrap --from-clawhub |
| "Compare my two implementations" | Local comparison | Confirm both Gene names, skip to Phase 3 |
| "I have a Skill I want to test" | Skill import evaluation | rotifer wrap --from-skill |
| "Help me build a XX scenario" | Scenario scaffolding | Guide Gene creation (rotifer init or manual phenotype) |
Phase 2: Compile & Verify
rotifer compile
Output guidance based on fidelity result:
- Wrapped: Verification passed, deterministic evaluation mode
- Hybrid/Native: WASM compilation, real sandbox execution mode (requires NAPI binding)
Phase 3: Automatic Opponent Matching
Priority order:
- User-specified: If the user says "compare X and Y", use those directly
- Same-domain local search: Highest-ranked Gene from
rotifer arena list --domain - Same-fidelity preferred: If target is Wrapped, prefer Wrapped opponents (avoid cross-fidelity blowouts)
- No opponent found: Inform the user, show current cross-domain Arena rankings for reference
Opponent selection requires user confirmation — show candidate F(g) and fidelity.
Phase 4: Arena Submit & Compare
rotifer arena submit
rotifer arena submit
rotifer arena list --domain
Collect evaluation results for both Genes.
Phase 5: Generate Evaluation Report
Output the full report in the conversation (rendered Markdown). Append at the end: > Reply "save" to write the report to arena-reports/.
When the user replies "save", write to /arena-reports/--vs-.md.
Report format requirements:
- Title = conclusion: Use scenario name + both Gene names, not a generic title
- Conclusion first: Immediately below the title, a
>blockquote with one-sentence summary of winner and key data - Concise comparison table: Only decision-relevant metrics (rank, F(g), V(g), Fidelity, success rate, latency, source), bold the winner
- Ranking visualization: Fixed-width ASCII table showing the full domain ranking, mark new entries with
← - Reproduction commands in a standalone bash block: Pure commands (no comments/output) for easy copy-paste
- No internal references: No ADR numbers, plan section numbers, or internal version notes
- Minimal metadata: One line at the bottom with date + CLI version + evaluation mode
Report structure (output directly in conversation):
- Title:
# Comparison: vs - Conclusion blockquote: One sentence — who won, key metric delta, core reason
- Comparison table: Rank, F(g), V(g), Fidelity, Success rate, Latency score, Source
- Current ranking: Full domain leaderboard (ASCII table,
←marks new entries) - Analysis: 2–3 paragraphs on fitness gap attribution, security comparison, same-fidelity positioning
- Upgrade path: Table with path / action / expected improvement / effort
- Reproduction steps: 4–5 pure CLI commands
- Next steps: 4 commands with brief descriptions
- Footer:
Generated on YYYY-MM-DD · @rotifer/playground@X.Y.Z · Mode: deterministic estimation
Scenario Examples
Example 1: Evaluate a ClawHub Skill's Competitiveness
User: Evaluate the web-search skill from ClawHub in the Rotifer ecosystemSkill execution:
- rotifer wrap clawhub-web-search --from-clawhub web-search -d search
- rotifer compile clawhub-web-search
- Auto-discover same-domain opponent: genesis-web-search (Native, F(g)=0.9470)
- rotifer arena submit clawhub-web-search
- Generate comparison report
Example 2: Compare Two Custom Genes
User: Compare my particle-brute and particle-spatial — which is better?Skill execution:
- Confirm both Genes exist with phenotype.json
- rotifer arena submit particle-brute
- rotifer arena submit particle-spatial
- rotifer arena list --domain sim.particle
- Generate comparison report
Example 3: Build a Quantitative Scenario
User: Help me build a quantitative strategy comparison scenarioSkill execution:
- Guide user to define domain (e.g. quant.strategy)
- Guide creation of two Gene phenotype.json files (Strategy A vs Strategy B)
- If compilable source exists, compile to WASM
- rotifer arena submit both Genes
- Generate scenario comparison report
Prerequisites
- Project has a
rotifer.json(if not, guiderotifer init) - CLI is built (
npm run buildin rotifer-playground) - ClawHub imports require network connectivity
Related Skills
| Skill | Relationship |
|---|---|
gene-dev | Route here when users need to create a Gene from scratch |
gene-migration | Route here when the report recommends a fidelity upgrade |
gene-audit | Suggest running when the report shows low security scores |
Constraints
- No automatic Cloud publishing: Comparison evaluation is a local operation; Cloud publishing requires explicit user confirmation
- Cross-fidelity comparisons need a disclaimer: The baseFitness gap between Wrapped and Native comes from the scoring model, not actual capability differences
- Reports are Markdown format: Ready for blogs, community sharing, or GitHub Issues