research-wiki
Skill452 starsChanged 23 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Operate the docs/research compiled layer in either full or maintain mode. Use for research-lane creation, research upkeep, authority-sensitive corpus work, source summaries, concepts, systems, decisions, and open-question pages.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
27 rules. 0 are common, 15 are distinctive, and 12 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.
15
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
12
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 32
Use them as sub-workflows, not as dead docs.
- Distinctive: line 37
Keep the workflow lossless relative to the support docs above.
- Distinctive: line 38
Update the research layer itself, not just the chat answer.
- Distinctive: line 39
If the topic is authority-sensitive and spans multiple likely corpora, do a
- Very specific: line 62
If evidence is thin or contradictory, say so explicitly and create an open-questions/ page instead of flattening uncertainty into fake law.
- Distinctive: line 96
create a new research lane from scratch
- Very specific: line 107
When full is chosen for a surface that obviously touches multiple editors or source families, do not stop after finding one useful source.
- Distinctive: line 110
Do the full corpus-level pass:
- Distinctive: line 115
run an official-source discovery step per corpus
- Distinctive: line 117
create a per-corpus evidence ledger
- Very specific: line 120
update index.md and log.md
- Distinctive: line 153
Do not end a full pass with silent corpora.
- Distinctive: line 155
If a likely corpus was scoped and produced no useful proof, say that directly.
- Very specific: line 158
Before recording raw gap, use official-source discovery to confirm that the missing coverage is real and not just a stale or incomplete …
- Very specific: line 161
Before recording evidence gap, read the strongest local raw hits that your searches surfaced for that corpus.
- Very specific: line 164
If raw evidence is missing for a scoped corpus after that discovery step, record a raw gap explicitly instead of quietly letting another …
- Very specific: line 168
If compiled pages are missing but raw exists, record a compile gap and create the missing source summary when safe.
- Very specific: line 171
If evidence exists but still does not answer the behavior question, record an evidence gap or contradiction gap instead of flattening it …
- Distinctive: line 175
If official discovery and local raw search already surfaced an obviously relevant file, you do not get to stop at "broad grep over corpus …
- Distinctive: line 193
Do not do “research” that only rephrases the first source you found.
- Very specific: line 194
Do not call something full if you only spot-checked one corpus when the topic obviously spans several.
- Very specific: line 196
Do not close full mode without an official-source discovery step for each scoped corpus.
- Distinctive: line 198
Do not treat grep hits as the same thing as inspected evidence.
- Distinctive: line 199
Do not record a corpus as thin, partial, or unresolved when the likely answer is already sitting in local raw unread.
- Very specific: line 201
Do not close full mode without a per-corpus evidence ledger.
- Distinctive: line 202
Do not bypass the compiled layer and patch law straight from raw evidence unless the task is tiny and the evidence is already obvious.
- Very specific: line 204
Do not leave index.md or log.md stale after adding research pages.
“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 Wiki
Handle $ARGUMENTS. This is the reusable workflow for operating the
docs/research compiled layer without turning research into one-off chat mush.
<task>#$ARGUMENTS</task>
Purpose
Turn the existing research command docs into one reusable skill entrypoint.
This skill should decide whether the job is:
- a full ingest-and-compile pass
- a maintain pass over an existing research lane
The support docs remain canonical detail:
- docs/research/commands/full-pipeline.md
- docs/research/commands/maintain.md
Use them as sub-workflows, not as dead docs.
Core Rules
docs/researchis the compiled layer;../rawis the evidence layer.- Keep the workflow lossless relative to the support docs above.
- Update the research layer itself, not just the chat answer.
- If the topic is authority-sensitive and spans multiple likely corpora, do a full corpus-level ingest across the relevant source families instead of a narrow spot check.
- In
fullmode, verify corpus completeness via an official-source discovery step before declaring a corpus missing, thin, or only partially evidenced. - In
fullmode, once official-source discovery confirms that the relevant raw family already exists locally, exhaust the strongest local raw hits before callingevidence gaporcontradiction gap. - In
fullmode, every scoped corpus must end in an explicit disposition:- strongest evidence found
- raw gap
- compile gap
- synthesis gap
- freshness gap
- evidence gap
- contradiction gap
- structure gap A full pass is not complete until every scoped corpus has one.
- Do not confuse:
- raw evidence
- compiled source summaries
- synthesized decisions
- open questions
- If evidence is thin or contradictory, say so explicitly and create an
open-questions/page instead of flattening uncertainty into fake law.
Read First
Always read:
- docs/research/README.md
- docs/research/index.md
- docs/research/log.md
Then choose one support doc:
- docs/research/commands/full-pipeline.md
for
full - docs/research/commands/maintain.md
for
maintain
Mode Selection
Use full when:
- the topic is broad or thinly covered
- the authority question is large enough that trusting the visible local slice would be reckless
- raw evidence is missing, stale, or uneven
- the surface spans multiple likely corpora
- trigger behavior, input behavior, or product claims need a full corpus-level ingest
Examples:
- compare Typora / Obsidian / Milkdown on one under-researched trigger surface
- rebuild a weak authority lane
- create a new research lane from scratch
Use maintain when:
- the lane already exists in
docs/research - the goal is contradiction cleanup, freshness, backlinks, or stronger compiled synthesis
- you need upkeep, not a new ingest push
Full-Mode Requirement
When full is chosen for a surface that obviously touches multiple editors or
source families, do not stop after finding one useful source.
Do the full corpus-level pass:
- scope the relevant corpora
- inspect existing compiled coverage
- inspect raw coverage across the relevant corpora
- run an official-source discovery step per corpus
- exhaust the strongest local raw hits per corpus
- create a per-corpus evidence ledger
- classify gaps per corpus
- fill what is safe
- update
index.mdandlog.md - return the remaining gaps honestly
For editor-behavior authority work, that often means some subset of:
- Typora
- Obsidian
- Milkdown
- Google Docs / GitHub Docs / Notion
depending on the actual surface
Per-Corpus Evidence Ledger
For full mode, explicitly close each scoped corpus with:
- corpus name
- compiled pages inspected
- raw paths inspected
- direct raw files actually read
- official source entrypoints checked
- strongest evidence found
- disposition:
evidencedraw gapcompile gapsynthesis gapfreshness gapevidence gapcontradiction gapstructure gap
- next action if still unresolved
Do not end a full pass with silent corpora.
If a likely corpus was scoped and produced no useful proof, say that directly. That is still a result.
Before recording raw gap, use official-source discovery to confirm that the
missing coverage is real and not just a stale or incomplete local raw mirror.
Before recording evidence gap, read the strongest local raw hits that your
searches surfaced for that corpus. Broad grep is routing, not proof.
If raw evidence is missing for a scoped corpus after that discovery step,
record a raw gap explicitly instead of quietly letting another corpus carry
the whole answer.
If compiled pages are missing but raw exists, record a compile gap and create
the missing source summary when safe.
If evidence exists but still does not answer the behavior question, record an
evidence gap or contradiction gap instead of flattening it into a partial
yes.
If official discovery and local raw search already surfaced an obviously relevant file, you do not get to stop at "broad grep over corpus X". Read the file and cite it, or explain why it was not actually relevant.
Outputs
A successful pass should leave behind durable artifacts such as:
- source summaries
- entity pages
- concept pages
- system pages
- decision pages
- open-question pages
- updated index/log entrypoints
Blunt Rules
- Do not do “research” that only rephrases the first source you found.
- Do not call something
fullif you only spot-checked one corpus when the topic obviously spans several. - Do not close
fullmode without an official-source discovery step for each scoped corpus. - Do not treat grep hits as the same thing as inspected evidence.
- Do not record a corpus as thin, partial, or unresolved when the likely answer is already sitting in local raw unread.
- Do not close
fullmode without a per-corpus evidence ledger. - Do not bypass the compiled layer and patch law straight from raw evidence unless the task is tiny and the evidence is already obvious.
- Do not leave
index.mdorlog.mdstale after adding research pages.
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 8
- wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep★ 18ksame name
- Immortalqx/my_codex_skills★ 54same name
- sjtuytc/ResearchMathAgent★ 35same name
- catalsqlb-cmd/Prism-H★ 16same name
- yvesory/academic-research-suite★ 9same name
- raja21068/AutoResearch★ 2same name
- YuchengZhang256/claude-code-workflow★ 1same name
- talhaMah56/claude_skills★ 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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use formula-derivation, research-lit and 3 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.
raja21068Skillformula-derivation
Structures and derives research formulas when the user wants to 推导公式, build a theory line, organize assumptions, turn scattered equations into a coherent derivation, or rewrite theory notes into a paper-ready formula document. Use when the derivation target is not yet fully fixed, the main object still needs to be chosen, or the user needs a coherent derivation package rather than a finished theorem proof.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Yusong-EnceladusSkillresearch-lit
Search and analyze research papers, find related work, summarize key ideas. Use when user says "find papers", "related work", "literature review", "what does this paper say", or needs to understand academic papers.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Yusong-EnceladusSkillproof-writer
Writes rigorous mathematical proofs for ML/AI theory. Use when asked to prove a theorem, lemma, proposition, or corollary, fill in missing proof steps, formalize a proof sketch, 补全证明, 写证明, 证明某个命题, or determine whether a claimed proof can actually be completed under the stated assumptions.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +2 more from Yusong-Enceladus
In this repository54 other files it gives its agents.
- .agents/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .agents/skills/autoreview/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .agents/skills/autoreview/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- 4-ultraciteSkill
- agent-browser-issueSkill
- agent-native-reviewerSkill
- architecture-cleanupSkill
- autoclosureSkill
- autogoalSkill
- autoreviewSkill
- autoSkill
- avoid-feature-creepSkill
- better-auth-best-practicesSkill
- changeset-doc-syncSkill
- changeset-resolveSkill
- changesetSkill
- component-colocationSkill
- concave-paritySkill
- concaveSkill
- convex-release-auditSkill
- designSkill
- deslopSkill
- diagnosing-bugsSkill
- find-skillsSkill
- grill-with-visionSkill
- hard-cutSkill
- jotai-xSkill
- kitcnSkill
- linear-backlogSkill
- major-taskSkill
- next-dev-loopSkill
- nextjsSkill
- orchestratorSkill
- package-release-auditSkill
- prototypeSkill
- react-querySkill
- resolve-pr-feedbackSkill
- resolving-merge-conflictsSkill
- scenariosSkill
- shadcn-paritySkill
- sync-convex-authSkill
- sync-visionSkill
- taskSkill
- tddSkill
- testingSkill
- toastSkill
- to-milestoneSkill
- to-prdSkill
- turborepoSkill
- video-transcriptsSkill
- visionSkill
- walkthroughSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

