research-question
Skill6 starsChanged 42 days agoMITView on GitHub
Turn a broad research request into a precise, answerable investigation with claims, evidence requirements, search strategy, and uncertainty tracking.
6 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- kinhluan/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- matthewdigiuseppe/MStacktheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- 1second1/personal-research-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 7, 2026
- deanmikan/ai-native-company-startertheir own version, first seen Sep 4, 2026
- crfldrxyz/AuthorOps-Skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 1, 2026
- KhaledSaeed18/dotclaudetheir own version, first seen Jul 4, 2026
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- matthewdigiuseppe/MStack★ 17same name
- kinhluan/skills★ 6same name
- KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude★ 5same name
- 1second1/personal-research-skills★ 1same name
- crfldrxyz/AuthorOps-Skills★ 0same name
- deanmikan/ai-native-company-starter★ 0same name
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 repository36 other files it gives its agents.
- bioinformatics-planningSkill
- biology-literature-analysisSkill
- biology-paper-analysisSkill
- chemistry-research-analysisSkill
- skill-authorSkill
- codebase-explorerSkill
- codebase-understandingSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- debug-systematicallySkill
- implementation-plannerSkill
- implementation-reviewSkill
- ledger-tasks-yyloSkill
- test-and-verifySkill
- algorithm-learningSkill
- system-design-basicsSkill
- defensive-security-reviewSkill
- threat-modelingSkill
- data-analysisSkill
- tutorSkill
- experiment-analysisSkill
- model-evaluationSkill
- numerical-methodsSkill
- mathematics-problem-solverSkill
- proof-solvingSkill
- physics-research-analysisSkill
- data-cleaningSkill
- data-visualizationSkill
- evidence-checkerSkill
- evidence-comparisonSkill
- experimental-planningSkill
- literature-synthesizerSkill
- reproducibility-auditSkill
- source-verificationSkill
- api-designSkill
- frontend-planningSkill
- technical-editorSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
2
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 16
Create a search plan using multiple independent source types.
- Distinctive: line 31
Do not treat popularity as evidence of correctness.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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
Research Question
Convert vague research goals into an evidence-driven investigation.
Process
- Restate the question in operational terms.
- Define scope, population, time period, and terminology.
- Break the question into answerable subquestions.
- Identify which claims require primary sources, reviews, datasets, experiments, or official documentation.
- Create a search plan using multiple independent source types.
- Track claims, evidence, contradictions, and unresolved gaps.
- Distinguish established findings from interpretation and speculation.
- Produce a synthesis that preserves uncertainty.
Source hierarchy
Prefer, when applicable:
- Primary research or original technical documentation
- Official datasets, standards, or institutional sources
- Systematic reviews and high-quality surveys
- Reputable secondary analysis
- Community discussions for practical experience or discovery
Do not treat popularity as evidence of correctness.
Output
Return:
- Research question
- Scope and definitions
- Subquestions
- Evidence plan
- Search terms
- Claim/evidence table
- Contradictions and gaps
- Final synthesis
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.

