Research Brief

Synthesizes multiple investigative notes or search snippets into an executive-level brief. Labels evidence confidence, cites sources explicitly, and identifies unresolved questions.

1. Purpose

Turn raw research findings into an actionable summary. A "Research Brief" answers a specific question, cites findings to source notes, and highlights confidence levels (High, Moderate, Low).

2. When to Use

Use this skill when:

• Synthesizing findings from multiple documentation pages, articles, or investigation logs.
• Delivering a research summary to an engineering or product lead.
• Answering questions that involve incomplete or conflicting data.

3. When Not to Use

• Do not use to summarize a single document; use factual-summarizer.
• Do not use to check isolated claims; use claim-checker.

4. Required Inputs

• research_topic: The core question or topic being investigated (string).
• source_notes: Numbered or titled notes from investigation (list or text).

5. Missing-Input Behavior

1. If research_topic is missing: stop and ask: "Please state the research topic or question."
2. If source_notes is empty: stop and report: "No source notes provided. Please provide investigation notes or links."
3. If source notes lack data on a sub-question: explicitly state it under "Known Uncertainties".

6. Procedure

Follow these numbered actions:

1. Action 1: Formulate Executive Summary
   • Write a 2-3 sentence overview answering the core question.
2. Action 2: Group Findings by Sub-Theme
   • Synthesize evidence with inline citations [Source 1], [Source 2].
3. Action 3: Assign Confidence Labels
   • High: Verified by multiple sources or authoritative documentation.
   • Moderate: Stated by a single source without conflicting evidence.
   • Low: Inferred, preliminary, or conflicting data.
4. Action 4: List Known Uncertainties and Recommended Next Steps
   • Highlight open questions and where to look next.
5. Action 5: Emit Research Brief
   • Format using Section 8.

7. Decision Rules

• If two sources conflict on numbers or behavior: present both numbers with their respective citations and mark confidence as Moderate or Low.
• Never invent a citation index not present in the source notes.

8. Output Format

Emit the brief using this template:

### Research Brief: [Topic]

#### Executive Summary
[2-3 sentence synthesis answering the core question.]

#### Key Findings
- **[Finding 1 Title]** (Confidence: [High | Moderate | Low]):
  [Explanation with citations, e.g. [Source 1]]
- **[Finding 2 Title]** (Confidence: [High | Moderate | Low]):
  [Explanation with citations]

#### Known Uncertainties & Gaps
- [Unresolved gap 1]
- [Unresolved gap 2]

#### Recommended Next Steps
1. [Actionable next investigation step]

9. Verification Checklist

• Every finding has an explicit citation [Source N].
• Every finding has a confidence rating.
• Conflicting findings are clearly noted.
• Uncertainties are explicitly separated from verified facts.

10. Common Failures and Recovery

11. Stop or Escalation Conditions

Stop and ask the user when:

• Source notes are contradictory to the point of preventing any coherent summary.

12. Examples

Example 1: Successful Execution

Input:

Topic: Feasibility of HTTP/3 in Node.js
Source 1 (Node docs): Node.js has experimental support for QUIC and HTTP/3 behind a build flag. Not enabled in default binary.
Source 2 (GitHub issue): Community maintains third-party packages, but production stability is unproven for high loads.

Output:

### Research Brief: Feasibility of HTTP/3 in Node.js

#### Executive Summary
HTTP/3 is currently feasible in Node.js only as an experimental preview or via reverse proxy. Core support is not enabled in standard production binaries.

#### Key Findings
- **Core HTTP/3 Support is Experimental** (Confidence: High):
  Node.js core contains QUIC and HTTP/3 support, but it requires building from source with specific flags and is not in standard binaries [Source 1].
- **Production Readiness Concerns** (Confidence: Moderate):
  Third-party modules exist, but issue discussions indicate lack of proven high-load stability in production [Source 2].

#### Known Uncertainties & Gaps
- Exact timeline for official unflagged HTTP/3 support in Node LTS is unstated.

#### Recommended Next Steps
1. Terminate HTTP/3 at edge proxy (Cloudflare, Envoy, or Nginx) rather than Node.js directly.

Example 2: Ambiguous or Missing Input

Input:

Topic: Quantum computing
Source notes: (None)

Output:

### Research Brief: Error - Missing Source Notes

- **Status**: Halted

No source notes were provided for the topic "Quantum computing". Please provide notes, documentation excerpts, or search snippets to synthesize.

Example 3: Expected Final Output

Output:

### Research Brief: SQLite Concurrency Capabilities

#### Executive Summary
SQLite supports concurrent readers with a single active writer when WAL (Write-Ahead Logging) mode is enabled.

#### Key Findings
- **WAL Mode Enables Concurrent Read/Write** (Confidence: High):
  Readers do not block writers and writers do not block readers under WAL mode [Source 1].
- **Single Writer Constraint** (Confidence: High):
  Concurrent write transactions still serialize; multiple simultaneous writers cause busy timeout [Source 1].

#### Known Uncertainties & Gaps
- Maximum transaction throughput under NVMe SSD storage was not benchmarked.

#### Recommended Next Steps
1. Benchmark expected write transactions per second against SQLite busy handler threshold.