deep-research
Skill1 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Investigate complex, contested, niche, or time-sensitive questions using systematic source discovery, cross-checking, and claim-level citations. Use when a quick search or memory-based answer would not provide enough confidence.
196 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ridelink0/ultimate-frontend-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- chrisblattman/claudeblattmantheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- genericService/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ourostack/ouroboros-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- mahsumaktas/agent-evolution-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- insight68/Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use community-led-growth, ph-community-outreach and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
nicepkgSkillcommunity-led-growth
Expert in community-led growth (CLG) - leveraging user communities to drive acquisition, retention, and expansion. Covers building developer communities, user groups, ambassador programs, and turning customers into advocates. Knows the difference between community as a feature vs community as a growth engine, and how to measure community ROI. Use when "community-led, CLG, ambassador program, champion program, user community, developer community, word of mouth, user group, " mentioned.
Also in 5 projects that use this
nicepkgSkillph-community-outreach
Engage Reddit, Indie Hackers, Hacker News and other communities for Product Hunt launches. Use this skill to identify relevant communities, craft appropriate posts, and drive cross-platform engagement without appearing spammy.
Also in 5 projects that use this
W-MoorerSkillacademic-paper-reviewer
Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy.
Also in 11 projects that use this
W-MoorerSkillacademic-pipeline
Orchestrator for the full academic research pipeline: research -> write -> integrity check -> review -> revise -> re-review -> re-revise -> final integrity check -> finalize. Coordinates deep-research, academic-paper, and academic-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory integrity verification, two-stage peer review, and reproducible quality gates. Triggers on: academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, complete paper workflow.
Also in 10 projects that use this
xfstudioSkillmicro-saas-launcher
Expert in launching small, focused SaaS products fast - the indie hacker approach to building profitable software. Covers idea validation, MVP development, pricing, launch strategies, and growing to sustainable revenue. Ship in weeks, not months. Use when: micro saas, indie hacker, small saas, side project, saas mvp.
Also in 5 projects that use this
stophobiaSkillsurprise-me
Create a delightful, unexpected "wow" experience for the user by dynamically discovering and creatively combining other enabled skills. Triggers when the user says "surprise me" or any request expressing a desire for an unexpected creative showcase. Also triggers when the user is bored, wants inspiration, or asks for "something interesting".
Also in 4 projects that use this
- +4 more from nicepkg
- +1 more from W-Moorer
Other versions196 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 196
- affaan-m/ECC★ 246ksame name
- bytedance/deer-flow★ 85ksame name
- Imbad0202/academic-research-skills★ 56ksame name
- THU-MAIC/OpenMAIC★ 43ksame name
- HKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills★ 12ksame name
- genspark-ai/genoffice★ 12ksame name
- advaitpaliwal/feynman★ 10ksame name
- companion-inc/feynman★ 10ksame name
- getcompanion-ai/feynman★ 10ksame name
- jordan-gibbs/hyperresearch★ 4.4ksame name
186 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- automateSkill
- autopilotSkill
- canvasSkill
- complex-problem-solvingSkill
- cost-estimateSkill
- create-hookSkill
- create-ruleSkill
- create-skillSkill
- create-subagentSkill
- large-figma-featureSkill
- loopSkill
- migrate-to-skillsSkill
- onboardSkill
- rename-chatSkill
- review-bugbotSkill
- review-securitySkill
- reviewSkill
- sdkSkill
- shellSkill
- split-to-prsSkill
- statuslineSkill
- update-cli-configSkill
- update-cursor-settingsSkill
- xcost-estimateSkill
- youspeak-aws-powerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 177 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 18
Search iteratively: begin broad enough to learn the vocabulary, then target primary evidence and unresolved gaps.
- Distinctive: line 19
Prefer primary and authoritative sources: official documents, original datasets, standards, filings, repositories, court or regulatory …
- Distinctive: line 21
Use independent sources where corroboration matters.
- Distinctive: line 29
Stop when the material subquestions are answered, further searches only repeat known evidence, and remaining gaps are clearly stated.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 177 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Deep Research
Produce a current, traceable synthesis that distinguishes evidence from inference and makes uncertainty visible.
Scope the investigation
- Clarify the research question, decision it supports, geographic and time boundaries, and the required depth.
- Break the question into subquestions and define what evidence would answer each one.
- Record consequential assumptions and ambiguous terms. Resolve them from context when safe; ask only when different interpretations would materially change the result.
Find evidence
- Search iteratively: begin broad enough to learn the vocabulary, then target primary evidence and unresolved gaps.
- Prefer primary and authoritative sources: official documents, original datasets, standards, filings, repositories, court or regulatory material, and peer-reviewed research. Use reputable secondary sources for context and competing interpretations.
- For technical claims, prefer official documentation and original papers. For current events, compare publication dates with the date the event occurred.
- Use independent sources where corroboration matters. Do not treat many articles repeating one underlying report as independent confirmation.
- Track provenance while researching: source, publication date, relevant claim, limitations, and whether the source is primary or secondary.
Evaluate and synthesize
- Assess relevance, recency, methodology, incentives, sample quality, and conflicts of interest.
- Separate directly supported facts from calculations, estimates, and inference. Reproduce calculations when practical.
- Actively search for disconfirming evidence and credible disagreement. Explain why sources conflict rather than averaging incompatible claims.
- Stop when the material subquestions are answered, further searches only repeat known evidence, and remaining gaps are clearly stated. Do not claim exhaustive coverage.
Deliver
Lead with the answer or decision-relevant findings. Organize the synthesis around the user's question rather than the order sources were found. Cite each externally verifiable claim near the supporting statement with direct links. Include important limitations, unresolved uncertainties, and the research cutoff date. Avoid long quotations and never invent citations, access, or certainty.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

