research-workflow
Skill1 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when a question needs iterative multi-source research, cost estimation, SaaS or product comparison, architecture research, incident investigation, source freshness tracking, or a repeated evidence refresh.
13 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- frontdesk-alhouse/alto-ostheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- GEUConn/research-idea-workflow-skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Bigsillymao/zotero-obsidian-ai-workflowtheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- crce-ux/research-workflowtheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- microsoft/ArgusAgenttheir own version, first seen Oct 16, 2026
- sherifican/Agent-FleetOpstheir own version, first seen Oct 7, 2026
Other versions13 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 13
- microsoft/ArgusAgent★ 140same name
- yoloshii/gigaxity-deep-research★ 61same name
- RipeMangoBox/BITE★ 60same name
- TenureAI/PhD-Zero★ 52same name
- sherifican/Agent-FleetOps★ 34same name
- GEUConn/research-idea-workflow-skill★ 17same name
- Bigsillymao/zotero-obsidian-ai-workflow★ 2same name
- arnaudgelas/K-Ops★ 1same name
- frontdesk-alhouse/alto-os★ 1same name
- crce-ux/research-workflow★ 0same name
3 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 repository3 other files it gives its agents.
- design-pressure-testSkill
- intent-discoverySkill
- test-auditSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 28
Use the Base directory for this skill reported by the skill loader.
- Distinctive: line 35
Reconcile before synthesis: When artifacts disagree, compare the original evidence, scope, and retrieval times.
- Very specific: line 41
Write only below $RESEARCH_HOME or its ~/.research fallback.
- Distinctive: line 42
Never write credentials, raw secret state, unnecessary personal data, or unbounded payloads.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 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 Workflow
Overview
Iterative research uses a durable workspace as the system of record; conversation is temporary.
Core principle: initialize manifest-first state, orient cheaply, deepen only identified gaps, and synthesize from persisted evidence.
Choose the mode
| Request | Mode |
| One supplied URL summary | Direct work |
| One local function explanation | Direct work |
| One known configuration answer | Direct work |
| One deterministic calculation | Direct work |
| One exact mechanical edit | Direct work |
| Multi-source comparison, uncertain estimate, architecture or incident investigation, or evidence refresh | Iterative research |
Manifest-first recipe
- Locate or initialize. Reuse the stable topic workspace; if absent, initialize before deep retrieval.
Use the
Base directory for this skillreported by the skill loader. Resolvescripts/init_workspace.pybelow that directory, then invoke it with Python 3 and the stable topic slug. Never guess a config, cache, or home-directory path. - Define the brief. Record goal, decision, scope, exclusions, constraints, and 3–7 questions.
- Orientation. Make 2–4 high-yield repository/task and primary-documentation reads. Record knowns, gaps, stale evidence, and next action.
- Deepen selectively. Investigate one gap using the narrowest authoritative source. Keep retrieval bounded by tenant, project, region, dates, fields, pages, and result count. Update source identity, authority, retrieval time, freshness, claims, and errors.
- Persist each cycle in order. First write detailed evidence, assumptions, calculations, and conclusions in their dedicated artifacts. Then update the corresponding compact
manifest.jsonandstate.mdsummaries. Finally append the cycle delta tochanges.md. Preserve stable question and source IDs. - Reconcile before synthesis. When artifacts disagree, compare the original evidence, scope, and retrieval times; do not blindly prefer the newest file. Keep unresolved discrepancies explicit, state their decision impact, and synthesize from the supported record.
- Refresh by delta. Resume the workspace, revalidate stale material, preserve last-known values after failures, and report only evidence, assumption, calculation, freshness, conclusion, and open-question deltas.
- Stop deliberately. Stop when evidence is sufficient and residual uncertainty cannot change the decision. If the agreed scope is exhausted, record material unanswered questions instead of claiming every question is answered. If authentication is unavailable, stop that tenant branch, preserve last-known evidence without presenting it as current, and never substitute public data. Persist the stop reason, unresolved questions, and decision impact in existing
state.mdsections and thechanges.mdentry.
Boundaries
- Write only below
$RESEARCH_HOMEor its~/.researchfallback. Read repository/task sources and explicitly declared external sources. - Never write credentials, raw secret state, unnecessary personal data, or unbounded payloads; minimize sensitive fields.
- Tenant facts require authenticated evidence; follow the stopping procedure when authentication fails.
- External publication, mutation, or synchronization requires explicit authorization and confirmed success.
- Artifact update order is an agent procedure, not synchronization tooling or a transactional or concurrent-writer guarantee.
Quick reference
| Need | Artifact/action |
| Current machine state | manifest.json (schema version 2) |
| Conclusion and next action | state.md |
| Evidence and freshness | sources.md |
| Assumptions and confidence | assumptions.md |
| Cycle deltas | changes.md |
| Detailed forms | Artifact templates |
| Fields and update rules | Manifest schema |
| Source choice | Source priority |
Example
For a SaaS cost comparison, initialize monitoring-cost, orient with current pricing and limits, record region/currency/date assumptions, calculate annual totals from persisted inputs, deepen billing or residency gaps, and report the recommendation plus uncertainty.
Common mistakes
- Searching before creating or resuming the manifest.
- Substituting polished prose for persisted evidence.
- Retrieving without a recorded gap or bound.
- Mixing facts, assumptions, and calculations.
- Repeating a full refresh instead of its delta.
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.

