agentleFS
sarbaksarbak/strategy-skills/deep-research/SKILL.md

deep-research

Skill0 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run deep research on specific questions to validate assumptions, check facts, and discover recent developments. Pairs with opportunity-analysis and storyline-synthesis for full strategy workflows. Use when the user wants to research specific questions, validate business assumptions, fact-check claims, or investigate a market. Also trigger when someone says "research this", "is this actually true?", "validate these assumptions", or "what's the current state of [topic]?"

196 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

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.
  • nicepkgSkill

    community-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

  • nicepkgSkill

    ph-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-MoorerSkill

    academic-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-MoorerSkill

    academic-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

  • xfstudioSkill

    micro-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

  • stophobiaSkill

    surprise-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

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

15 rules. 0 are common, 14 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 177 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 14

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Run focused research on specific questions to validate assumptions, check facts, and discover what's changed recently.

    line 16
  2. Distinctive:

    If the user provides specific questions as arguments, use those.

    line 24
  3. Very specific:

    If no questions provided, look for a DEEP_RESEARCH_REQUEST.md or strategy/DEEP_RESEARCH_REQUEST.md in the working directory.

    line 25
  4. Distinctive:

    If neither exists, ask the user what they want researched.

    line 26
  5. Distinctive:

    Before researching anything, scan all existing docs in the project's strategy/analysis subfolder.

    line 30
  6. Distinctive:

    Research top-down: Don't research Level 3 until Level 0-1 are validated.

    line 44
  7. Distinctive:

    Write a well-formed, specific query with context.

    line 51
  8. Distinctive:

    Ask for specific numbers, company names, and recent developments

    line 55
  9. Distinctive:

    Use available research tools (Perplexity MCP, WebSearch, WebFetch, or other configured search tools) to find answers.

    line 59
  10. Distinctive:

    After Level 0-1 answers come back:

    line 69
  11. Distinctive:

    If confirmed -> proceed to Level 2-3 questions in Step 6/8

    line 70
  12. Distinctive:

    If partially wrong -> reframe the thesis, rewrite lower-level questions before proceeding

    line 71
  13. Distinctive:

    If fundamentally wrong -> stop.

    line 72
  14. Distinctive:

    Write a summary section at the end with:

    line 98
  15. Distinctive:

    After all questions are researched, the summary must clearly state which assumptions survived and which didn't.

    line 111

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Deep Research

Run focused research on specific questions to validate assumptions, check facts, and discover what's changed recently.

This process has 8 steps. Complete every step in order. Do not skip steps. When reporting progress, label each step as shown (e.g., "Step 3/8").


Step 1/8 -- Determine research questions

  1. If the user provides specific questions as arguments, use those.
  2. If no questions provided, look for a DEEP_RESEARCH_REQUEST.md or strategy/DEEP_RESEARCH_REQUEST.md in the working directory.
  3. If neither exists, ask the user what they want researched.

Step 2/8 -- Check for overlap with existing work

Before researching anything, scan all existing docs in the project's strategy/analysis subfolder. Don't re-research what's already answered. Note which questions are already covered (partially or fully) and skip them.

Step 3/8 -- Verify the question hierarchy

Questions must be ordered by how fundamental they are. If a higher-level assumption is wrong, lower-level questions are irrelevant.

Level 0: Does the core capability actually work / is it differentiated?
  +-- Level 1: Is the market structure what we think it is?
       +-- Level 2: Will someone actually pay for this?
            +-- Level 3: Are our specific market picks right?
                 +-- Level 4: Can we execute? (timing, legal, competitive dynamics)

Research top-down. Don't research Level 3 until Level 0-1 are validated. Assign each question a level.

Step 4/8 -- Research Level 0-1 questions

For each question at Level 0-1:

Step 4a/8 -- Form a specific query

Write a well-formed, specific query with context. Tips:

  • BAD: "Is the market big?"
  • GOOD: "How many SaaS companies in the US currently pay for third-party pricing benchmarking data, who are the top 3 providers, and what do they charge?"
  • Include context in the query: "In the context of [industry] companies evaluating [specific service]..."
  • Ask for specific numbers, company names, and recent developments
  • One focused question per query -- don't combine multiple topics

Step 4b/8 -- Execute the search

Use available research tools (Perplexity MCP, WebSearch, WebFetch, or other configured search tools) to find answers.

Step 4c/8 -- Record findings

For each question, record:

  • What we assumed vs. what's actually true (with sources)
  • Red flags -- assumptions that are significantly wrong
  • New opportunities the research reveals

Step 5/8 -- Assess whether to proceed

After Level 0-1 answers come back:

  • If confirmed -> proceed to Level 2-3 questions in Step 6/8
  • If partially wrong -> reframe the thesis, rewrite lower-level questions before proceeding
  • If fundamentally wrong -> stop. Report findings. The thesis needs restructuring.

Step 6/8 -- Research Level 2-4 questions

Repeat the same sub-steps as Step 4/8 (form query -> execute -> record) for each remaining question at Levels 2-4. After each level, reassess whether the lower-level questions are still relevant.

Step 7/8 -- Write the results document

Save results to strategy/DEEP_RESEARCH_RESULTS.md (or alongside the request file). Structure per question:

### Question: [the specific question]

**Our assumption:** [what we believed]

**What's actually true:** [findings with sources]

**What's changed recently:** [any developments since our analysis]

**Red flags:** [anything that invalidates our thesis]

**New opportunities:** [anything we didn't see before]

Step 8/8 -- Summary and share

Write a summary section at the end with:

  • (a) Assumptions confirmed
  • (b) Assumptions wrong
  • (c) Storyline changes needed
  • (d) New questions raised by the research

Rules

  • Research ONLY the critical questions. Don't expand scope.
  • Cite sources for every factual claim.
  • Be honest when you can't find a definitive answer -- "unclear, needs expert interview" is a valid result.
  • After all questions are researched, the summary must clearly state which assumptions survived and which didn't.

Tips for writing good research queries

  • BAD: "Is the market big?"
  • GOOD: "What is the total addressable market for [specific product category] in [geography] as of 2025, and which companies currently serve this market?"
  • Include context: "In the context of [industry] companies evaluating [specific capability]..."
  • Ask for specific numbers, company names, and recent developments
  • One focused question per query -- don't combine multiple topics

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.