teach-research
Skill0 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Research companion for the teach skill — interviews for the mission, fans out parallel finder agents across six source modalities, gates the candidate list through the user, then caches approved sources as digests, leaving MISSION.md, RESOURCES.md, and research/ ready for /teach to consume. The teach skill itself is never modified. Typed-only entry point (/teach-research <topic>) — run it from a dedicated learning directory, not inside a project repo, since it writes workspace files at the root of wherever it runs. Append --auto to skip the interactive pauses (mission confirm + curation gate) for unattended runs.
In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- .claude/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- architecture-viewerSkill
- daySkill
- pre-compactSkill
- retireSkill
- reweaveSkill
- visual-summarySkill
- wayfinder-mapSkill
- youtube-breakdownSkill
- youtube-transcriptSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 50
Before any other step — including the mission step — check that the current directory is a dedicated learning workspace:
- Very specific: line 53
If MISSION.md already exists here, this is an established workspace: proceed.
- Distinctive: line 60
Never create the first workspace file until the location is confirmed.
- Very specific: line 72
Mission: If MISSION.md exists, summarize it back to the user in two sentences and ask for a brief confirm (in auto mode, an existing …
- Very specific: line 85
Read the workspace: Read whichever of RESOURCES.md and NOTES.md exist, both read-only (*teach-untouched* forbids writing NOTES.md, not …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
The user wants a learning workspace stocked with vetted sources before (or between) /teach
sessions — so that lesson one is a lesson, not a search. This skill front-loads the
resource-finding work the teach skill would otherwise do inline during teaching sessions.
Relationship to the teach skill
This skill writes exactly three things at the root of the current directory: MISSION.md,
RESOURCES.md, and research/. The first two are files the teach skill already reads, in
formats the teach skill owns — read ../teach/MISSION-FORMAT.md
and ../teach/RESOURCES-FORMAT.md before writing either.
research/ digests follow RESEARCH-FORMAT.md, owned here.
Invariants
Referenced by name below. Each invariant holds on every path, whether or not a step cites it.
- teach-untouched — never edit the teach skill's files, and never write any workspace file
other than the three above.
lessons/,reference/,learning-records/,assets/,GLOSSARY.md, andNOTES.mdbelong to the teach skill. - mission-grounded — no discovery begins until
MISSION.mdexists and has been confirmed this run — by the user interactively, or implicitly in auto mode, where an existing mission counts as confirmed. Every finder brief carries the mission. - never-clobber — existing
MISSION.mdcontent and existingRESOURCES.mdentries are merged into, never overwritten or removed. Pruning is the user's move, not this skill's. - verified-links — no URL reaches the candidate table unless whoever put it there confirmed this run that it resolves: the finder, for a candidate it proposes; the main context, for a deferred candidate it re-tables from an earlier run. A source that cannot be verified is reported as a gap, not listed as a source.
- digest-not-dump — cache files are digests with select attributed quotes, never verbatim copies. Unfetchable sources get metadata-only digests; content is never fabricated.
- honest-gaps — every modality no finder could cover, every candidate cut for a reason
worth remembering, and every failed fetch lands in the
## Gapssection ofRESOURCES.md. Candidates the skipped gate cut unseen in auto mode land in## Deferred candidatesinstead: they are verified sources awaiting a decision, not missing coverage, and## Gapsis what drives future search. Silent omission is the failure mode this invariant exists to prevent. - gate-only-auto —
--autoremoves exactly two pauses: the mission confirm (step 3, and only whenMISSION.mdalready exists) and the curation gate (step 6). It never skips the workspace guard, the mission interview, or verification.
Workspace Guard
Before any other step — including the mission step — check that the current directory is a dedicated learning workspace:
- If
MISSION.mdalready exists here, this is an established workspace: proceed. - Otherwise, if the directory shows signs of being a software project or other pre-existing
content (
.git,package.json,CLAUDE.md, source code, an existingassets/orNOTES.md), or is the user's home directory, stop before writing anything: report the resolved current directory and the exact paths this skill would write (MISSION.md,RESOURCES.md,research/), suggest a dedicated directory instead (e.g.~/Learning/<topic>/), and wait for the user to confirm this location or point at another. Never create the first workspace file until the location is confirmed. In an unattended run, an unconfirmed location is a stop-and-report, never a wait. - Otherwise — nothing above matched: an empty directory, or one holding only content this skill wrote — proceed.
Procedure
- Parse the invocation. The argument is the topic; the literal token
--autoanywhere in it sets auto mode (gate-only-auto) and is stripped from the topic text before the topic is used anywhere. No topic and no existingMISSION.md→ ask for one (in an unattended run, stop and report instead). - Run the Workspace Guard above.
- Mission. If
MISSION.mdexists, summarize it back to the user in two sentences and ask for a brief confirm (in auto mode, an existing mission is taken as confirmed). A topic argument supplied alongside an existing mission is this run's narrowing focus, not a new mission: say so in the summary and carry it into step 5's briefs, so the finders hunt that corner of the mission rather than all of it. If the argument plainly names a different subject than the mission, stop and report instead — one mission per workspace, so a different subject means a different workspace (../teach/MISSION-FORMAT.md). IfMISSION.mddoes not exist, run a mission interview in the style the teach skill prescribes — push back on vagueness, concrete over abstract, one question at a time — and writeMISSION.mdper ../teach/MISSION-FORMAT.md. In a truly unattended run (subagent, cron, cloud one-shot) with noMISSION.md, stop and report instead: a mission cannot be invented on the user's behalf (mission-grounded). - Read the workspace. Read whichever of
RESOURCES.mdandNOTES.mdexist, both read-only (teach-untouched forbids writingNOTES.md, not reading it). If either records that the user has opted out of joining communities, skip the communities finder in step 5 and say so in the close: a recorded opt-out is durable, and re-proposing communities every run is the outcome that rule exists to prevent. IfRESOURCES.mdexists, this run is a top-up: read every existing entry, the current## Gapssection, and the current## Deferred candidatessection. Finders receive all three and use them differently — gaps are what to hunt for, entries and deferred candidates are what not to propose again — and results will merge (never-clobber). - Discovery fan-out. Dispatch one finder subagent per modality in parallel:
official docs / primary sources · books · structured courses · video · papers &
high-signal blogs · communities (dropped when step 4 found a recorded opt-out). Each
finder's brief contains:
MISSION.mdverbatim and whole — all four sections, so thatConstraintsandOut of scopereach the finder along withWhyandSuccess looks like(mission-grounded); this run's narrowing focus if step 3 established one; its single modality; the already-held sources and deferred candidates to exclude (top-up mode); and the required return shape — for each candidate: title, URL, type, author plus one line on why they are trustworthy, what it covers, one line on mission fit, and whether it is one of the finder's top 2–3 picks. A candidate that breaks aConstraintsbound — budget, time, equipment, stated learning preference — or falls underOut of scopeis dropped by the finder, not proposed for the gate to catch. Each finder must fetch every URL it proposes and drop any that does not resolve, returning it as a gap line instead (verified-links, honest-gaps); it reports a thin modality honestly rather than padding with weak sources (honest-gaps). - Curation gate. Merge the finders' returns, dedup by URL and by near-identical title,
and present one table grouped by modality — columns: #, title (linked to the URL), type, why
trusted, mission fit, keep/cut recommendation. In top-up mode, anything already sitting in
## Deferred candidatesjoins the table marked as deferred by an earlier run, so the user can pull one in — the finders were told not to re-propose it, which also means no finder verified it: re-fetch each of those URLs here before tabling it, and send any that no longer resolves to## Gapsas a failed fetch instead of offering it. Its link was verified whenever it was deferred, which may be months ago (verified-links). The user trims, swaps, or says "take all"; wait for that answer. In auto mode (gate-only-auto): keep exactly the finders' top picks, cut the rest, record the auto-cut candidates (title + URL, one line each) as candidates deferred by the skipped gate — step 8 writes them into## Deferred candidates, never into## Gaps, because they are verified sources the user has not yet seen rather than coverage nobody could find — and record in the closing summary that the gate was skipped. - Caching fan-out. Assign the target paths here, before dispatching anything: cachers run
in parallel and cannot see each other's writes, so the main context is the only actor that
can see a collision coming. It holds every kept title, and it lists
research/here (read-only) to learn what earlier runs already wrote — no step before this one does. Derive each slug per RESEARCH-FORMAT.md, append-2(then-3, …) wherever two kept sources slugify alike or the slug is already on disk, and hand each cacher the exact path to write. Then batch the kept sources three to four per cacher subagent. Each cacher fetches its sources and writes one digest per source at the path it was given, per RESEARCH-FORMAT.md — the digest template, theFetchedfield, and the metadata-only rules are all in that doc, so it belongs in every cacher's brief (digest-not-dump) — never a path it derived itself, and never over an existing file: a path that turns out to be taken is reported back, not overwritten. A fetch that fails mid-run downgrades that source to a metadata-only digest plus a gap note — it never aborts the run (honest-gaps). Each cacher returns, per source: the exact path it wrote, theFetchedvalue (a date, or the not-fetched reason), any collision it hit, and any gap note. - Write
RESOURCES.mdper ../teach/RESOURCES-FORMAT.md, with three additions this skill owns: each entry ends with a lineCached: ./research/<slug>.md— using the exact path its cacher returned, never a re-derived slug; a single line sits directly under the title:Entries marked "Cached:" have local digests in ./research/ — read the digest before searching the web.; and, in auto mode, a## Deferred candidatessection holding the candidates the skipped gate cut unseen, one line each with title and URL, under a sentence saying they were never shown to the user. Write the## Gapssection from the genuine absences honest-gaps collected — modalities no finder could cover, failed fetches, candidates cut for a reason worth remembering — and nothing else. In top-up mode, merge new entries into the existing sections and rewrite## Gapsand## Deferred candidatesto reflect what is still open. A gap leaves## Gapsonly when this run's finders hunted it and it is now filled: a pre-existing gap outside this run's narrowing focus was never hunted, so it carries forward verbatim — an unhunted gap is not a filled one, and a learning workspace has no VCS to recover it from. A deferred candidate leaves when the user pulls it in at step 6, now that it is an entry. (never-clobber for entries; these two sections are the ones this skill rewrites, because a filled gap and an adopted candidate are not history worth keeping.) - Verify the contract. Confirm: every
RESOURCES.mdentry'sCached:path exists; every file inresearch/is linked from some entry; the number of entries carrying aCached:line equals the number of files inresearch/— two entries pointing at one digest is a slug collision that overwrote a source, which the first two checks both pass; no file outsideMISSION.md,RESOURCES.md,research/was created or modified (teach-untouched). Any check that fails is reported in the close, not repaired: never delete aresearch/file and never rewrite a pre-existing entry (never-clobber). The one exception is aCached:line this run wrote that points nowhere — drop that line and note it in## Gapsbefore the close. - Close. Report to the user: sources found per modality, what was cached, the open gaps,
whether the gate was skipped — and finish with: run
/teachfrom this directory; the mission is answered and the resources are stocked.
Unattended runs
Auto mode makes steps 4–10 fully unattended — steps 1–3 can still stop and report (wrong
directory, no mission) but never wait — so /teach-research <topic> --auto can run
overnight in a workspace whose MISSION.md already exists (or interactively, where the
mission interview runs first and everything after is automatic). Unattended with no mission =
stop and report, per step 3.
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.

