deep-research
Skill1 starsChanged 13 months agoMITView on GitHub
Base directory for this skill: /mnt/c/git/claude_code_project_template/.claude/skills/deep-research THIS IS AN AUTONOMOUS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR CLAUDE You (Claude) conduct comprehensive, multi-phase research using your built-in tools (WebSearch, WebFetch). No external APIs, no Python scripts, no dependencies - just your own reasoning and research capabilities. When a user needs comprehensive research: 1. You conduct the research using WebSearch and WebFetch 2. You analyze and synthesize using your reasoning 3. You write professional reports using Write tool 4. You cite sources properly with verification
196 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ridelink0/ultimate-frontend-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- chrisblattman/claudeblattmantheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- genericService/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ourostack/ouroboros-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- mahsumaktas/agent-evolution-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- insight68/Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
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.
nicepkgSkillcommunity-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
nicepkgSkillph-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-MoorerSkillacademic-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-MoorerSkillacademic-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
xfstudioSkillmicro-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
stophobiaSkillsurprise-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
Other versions196 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 196
- affaan-m/ECC★ 246ksame name
- bytedance/deer-flow★ 85ksame name
- Imbad0202/academic-research-skills★ 56ksame name
- THU-MAIC/OpenMAIC★ 43ksame name
- HKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills★ 12ksame name
- genspark-ai/genoffice★ 12ksame name
- advaitpaliwal/feynman★ 10ksame name
- companion-inc/feynman★ 10ksame name
- getcompanion-ai/feynman★ 10ksame name
- jordan-gibbs/hyperresearch★ 4.4ksame name
186 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 repository40 other files it gives its agents.
- agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .cursor/rules/always.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/atlassian/atlassian_integration.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/computer_use/computer_use_agent.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/documentation.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/fstrent_spec_tasks/claude_code_cli.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/github/github_integration.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/powershell.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/silicon_valley_personality.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/virtual_environments_python.mdCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/web_tools/web_tools.mdcCursor rule
- artifacts-builderSkill
- atlassian-integrationSkill
- claude-code-cli-integrationSkill
- computer-use-agentSkill
- fstrent-code-reviewerSkill
- fstrent-planningSkill
- fstrent-qaSkill
- fstrent-task-managementSkill
- github-integrationSkill
- hanx-database-toolsSkill
- hanx-knowledge-baseSkill
- hanx-mediawikiSkill
- hanx-youtube-researcherSkill
- internal-commsSkill
- mcp-builderSkill
- oracle-apex-developmentSkill
- patent-filing-aiSkill
- Project SetupSkill
- research-methodologySkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- startup-business-formationSkill
- startup-product-developmentSkill
- startup-resource-accessSkill
- startup-vc-fundraisingSkill
- template-skillSkill
- web-toolsSkill
- youtube-rag-storageSkill
- youtube-video-analysisSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 177 edited versions we read keep these.
12
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 11
When a user needs comprehensive research:
- Distinctive: line 54
How deep: should the research be? (mode selection)
- Distinctive: line 64
Comparison factors: If comparing options, what criteria matter?
- Distinctive: line 68
Create search query variations:
- Distinctive: line 172
Don't just summarize: - add value through:
- Distinctive: line 182
Every research report should include:
- Distinctive: line 231
When to use each
- Distinctive: line 374
Use cases and benefits
- Distinctive: line 532
Right: Verify important claims across 3+ sources
- Distinctive: line 535
Wrong: Use 2019 article about 2025 technology
- Distinctive: line 554
Create tasks based on research findings
- Distinctive: line 559
Use findings to inform PRD
“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.
Files
Base directory for this skill: /mnt/c/git/claude_code_project_template/.claude/skills/deep-research
Deep Research Skill - Claude-Native Autonomous Research
THIS IS AN AUTONOMOUS RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR CLAUDE
You (Claude) conduct comprehensive, multi-phase research using your built-in tools (WebSearch, WebFetch). No external APIs, no Python scripts, no dependencies - just your own reasoning and research capabilities.
Core Concept
When a user needs comprehensive research:
- You conduct the research using WebSearch and WebFetch
- You analyze and synthesize using your reasoning
- You write professional reports using Write tool
- You cite sources properly with verification
This is NOT manual research guidance. This IS your autonomous research workflow.
When to Use This Skill
Activate when user requests:
- "Research X comprehensively"
- "Deep dive into Y"
- "Compare multiple options for Z"
- "I need a detailed analysis of..."
- "Investigate A thoroughly"
- "Literature review on B"
Trigger phrases: research, investigate, analyze, deep dive, comprehensive, comparison, literature review
Research Modes
Quick Research (5-10 sources, ~10 minutes)
Use when: User needs quick overview or has time constraints Process: 2-3 WebSearch queries, 5-8 WebFetch calls, basic synthesis
Standard Research (10-15 sources, ~20 minutes)
Use when: Most research requests (DEFAULT) Process: 4-5 WebSearch queries, 10-12 WebFetch calls, detailed synthesis
Comprehensive Research (20-30 sources, ~40 minutes)
Use when: User explicitly requests "comprehensive", "thorough", "detailed" Process: 6-8 WebSearch queries, 20-25 WebFetch calls, exhaustive synthesis
Iterative Research (30+ sources, ~60 minutes)
Use when: User requests "exhaustive", "complete guide", "everything about X" Process: Multi-phase research with section-based deep dives
Phase 1: Research Planning
Step 1: Understand the Request
Clarify:
- What exactly needs to be researched?
- How deep should the research be? (mode selection)
- What output does the user expect?
- Any specific focus areas or constraints?
Ask clarifying questions if needed, but don't over-clarify obvious requests.
Step 2: Break Down the Topic
Identify research dimensions:
- Core concepts: What are the fundamental aspects?
- Key questions: What specific questions need answering?
- Comparison factors: If comparing options, what criteria matter?
- Information sources: What types of sources are most valuable?
Step 3: Plan Search Strategy
Create search query variations:
- Broad queries: "X overview", "what is X"
- Specific queries: "X best practices", "X vs Y", "X tutorial"
- Current queries: "X 2025", "X latest", "X recent updates"
- Authoritative queries: "X official documentation", "X specification"
- Problem-focused: "X challenges", "X pitfalls", "X comparison"
Example for "React state management":
- "React state management overview"
- "React state management best practices 2025"
- "Redux vs MobX vs Zustand comparison"
- "React state management official documentation"
- "React state management patterns"
Phase 2: Information Gathering
Step 1: Execute Multi-Search Strategy
DO THIS (parallel searches for efficiency):
Use WebSearch tool multiple times in PARALLEL with different queries:
- Query 1: Broad overview
- Query 2: Best practices/recent
- Query 3: Comparison/alternatives
- Query 4: Official documentation
- Query 5: Specific aspect (if needed)From each search:
- Note promising URLs (official docs, reputable sites, recent articles)
- Identify key themes appearing across results
- Skip obviously low-quality sources
Step 2: Fetch Detailed Content
Prioritize sources in this order:
- Official documentation (.org, official project sites)
- Reputable technical sites (MDN, CSS-Tricks, Smashing Magazine, web.dev)
- Well-known blogs (Vercel, Netlify, major tech companies)
- Recent articles (2024-2025)
- Community resources (GitHub discussions, Stack Overflow)
Use WebFetch in PARALLEL for top 10-25 sources (based on mode):
Fetch multiple URLs simultaneously:
- Official docs (highest priority)
- 3-5 reputable technical articles
- 2-3 comparison/analysis pieces
- 2-3 recent articles (currency)
- 1-2 community discussions (real-world perspective)Extract from each fetch:
- Key points and insights
- Quotes worth citing
- Code examples (if relevant)
- Author/publication date
- URL for citation
Step 3: Assess Source Quality
For each source, note:
- Authority: Official docs > Expert blogs > Community content
- Currency: Recent (2024-2025) > Older content
- Depth: Detailed analysis > Surface-level overviews
- Objectivity: Balanced perspective > Promotional content
Trust indicators:
- .gov, .edu, .org domains
- Official project documentation
- Recognized expert authors
- Recent publication dates
- Multiple corroborating sources
Phase 3: Analysis and Synthesis
Step 1: Organize Findings
Group information by themes:
- Core concepts: Fundamental understanding
- Approaches/Options: Different ways to solve the problem
- Best practices: Recommended patterns
- Common pitfalls: What to avoid
- Real-world usage: How it's used in practice
- Tradeoffs: Pros and cons of different approaches
Step 2: Identify Patterns
Look for:
- Consensus: What do multiple sources agree on?
- Disagreements: Where do sources conflict?
- Evolution: How has thinking changed over time?
- Trends: What's emerging or declining?
- Gaps: What information is missing?
Step 3: Synthesize Insights
Your job (Claude's unique value):
- Connect dots: Link concepts across sources
- Provide context: Explain why things matter
- Identify trade-offs: Weigh pros and cons
- Give perspective: What's most important?
- Make recommendations: Based on synthesis
Don't just summarize - add value through:
- Cross-source analysis
- Pattern identification
- Contextual understanding
- Nuanced recommendations
Phase 4: Report Generation
Structure Your Report
Every research report should include:
1. Executive Summary (2-3 paragraphs)
- What was researched
- Key findings in brief
- Main recommendation
- Critical takeaways
2. Research Objective
- What question was answered
- Why this research was needed
- Scope boundaries
3. Key Findings (Organized by Theme)
For each theme:
### Finding 1: [Theme Name]
[Detailed explanation of finding]
**Key Points**:
- Point 1 [Source 1]
- Point 2 [Source 2]
- Point 3 [Source 3]
**Analysis**: [Your synthesis and insights]4. Comparisons (if applicable)
Create comparison tables:
| Feature | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|---------|----------|----------|----------|
| Complexity | Low | Medium | High |
| Performance | Good | Excellent | Fair |
| Use Cases | Small projects | Large apps | Specific needs |5. Best Practices
- Recommended approaches
- Industry standards
- Common patterns
- Expert advice
6. Recommendations
- Primary recommendation with rationale
- Alternative approaches
- When to use each
- Implementation guidance
7. Sources and References
Citation format:
## References
1. [Title] - [Author/Organization] ([Date]) - [URL]
2. [Title] - [Author/Organization] ([Date]) - [URL]Example:
1. "React State Management Guide" - React Team (2025) - https://react.dev/learn/managing-state
2. "Redux vs Zustand: A Comparison" - Lee Robinson (2024) - https://vercel.com/blog/redux-zustand8. Metadata
---
**Research Date**: [Date]
**Researcher**: Claude Code
**Sources Consulted**: [Number]
**Research Mode**: [Quick/Standard/Comprehensive/Iterative]
**Confidence Level**: [High/Medium/Low]Use the Write Tool
Save research to:
docs/research/[topic-slug]_[timestamp].mdExample:
docs/research/react_state_management_20251020_143022.mdResearch Workflow Examples
Example 1: Technology Comparison
User: "Compare React state management solutions"
Your Process:
- Plan (30 seconds):
- Research Redux, Zustand, Jotai, MobX, React Context
- Compare: complexity, performance, use cases, ecosystem
- Mode: Comprehensive (user wants thorough comparison)
- Search (5 minutes):
WebSearch in parallel: - "React state management comparison 2025" - "Redux vs Zustand vs Jotai" - "React state management best practices" - "React state management official documentation" - "React state management performance" - Fetch (15 minutes):
WebFetch in parallel (top 20 sources): - Official React docs on state - Redux official docs - Zustand GitHub + docs - Jotai docs - 5-8 comparison articles - 3-4 recent blog posts - 2-3 GitHub discussions - Analyze (10 minutes):
- Create comparison matrix
- Identify use cases for each
- Note pros/cons
- Synthesize recommendations
- Write Report (10 minutes):
- Executive summary
- Detailed comparison
- Comparison table
- Recommendations by use case
- 20+ citations
Output: 15-20 page comprehensive comparison report
Example 2: Best Practices Research
User: "Research API design best practices"
Your Process:
- Plan:
- Research REST, GraphQL, design patterns
- Find industry standards
- Mode: Standard (typical request)
- Search:
- "API design best practices 2025" - "REST API design principles" - "API design patterns" - "API security best practices" - Fetch (12 sources):
- Industry standards (OpenAPI, JSON:API)
- Expert blog posts
- Company engineering blogs
- Official documentation
- Analyze:
- Identify common patterns
- Note industry consensus
- Extract specific guidelines
- Write Report:
- Best practices by category
- Code examples
- Anti-patterns to avoid
- Recommendations
Output: 10-15 page best practices guide
Example 3: Deep Dive Technical Topic
User: "Deep dive into React Server Components"
Your Process:
- Plan:
- Understand architecture
- How they work
- Use cases and benefits
- Mode: Comprehensive
- Search:
- "React Server Components explained" - "React Server Components architecture" - "React Server Components vs Client Components" - "React Server Components use cases" - "React Server Components Next.js" - Fetch (20 sources):
- Official React docs (primary)
- React team blog posts
- Next.js documentation
- Technical deep dives
- Real-world examples
- Analyze:
- How RSC works (architecture)
- Benefits and trade-offs
- Use cases
- Integration patterns
- Write Report:
- Technical architecture explanation
- Conceptual diagrams (text)
- Code examples
- Best practices
- Common patterns
Output: 20-25 page technical deep dive
Iterative Research Mode (Advanced)
For exhaustive research (30+ sources, 60+ minutes):
Phase 1: Overview Research
- Broad searches to understand landscape
- Fetch 5-8 overview sources
- Identify main topic areas/sections
Phase 2: Section Identification
Based on overview, identify 4-6 major sections:
- Example for "Banking Regulations":
- Section 1: Regulatory Framework
- Section 2: Compliance Requirements
- Section 3: Reporting Standards
- Section 4: Security Requirements
- Section 5: Audit Procedures
Phase 3: Deep Dive Each Section
For each section:
- Targeted searches
- Fetch 5-8 sources per section
- Detailed analysis
- Section write-up
Phase 4: Synthesis
- Combine all sections
- Add cross-references
- Create comprehensive document
- Final review and polish
Result: 30-50+ page exhaustive research document
Quality Standards
Every Research Report Must Have
✅ Multiple Sources:
- Minimum 5 sources for quick research
- Minimum 10 sources for standard
- Minimum 20 sources for comprehensive
✅ Proper Citations:
- All claims cited
- URLs included
- Publication dates noted
- Sources verified
✅ Synthesis, Not Just Summary:
- Your analysis and insights
- Connections across sources
- Pattern identification
- Recommendations
✅ Professional Structure:
- Clear headings
- Logical organization
- Executive summary
- Actionable recommendations
✅ Source Quality:
- Prioritize authoritative sources
- Recent content preferred
- Multiple perspectives
- Fact-checked where possible
Self-Check Before Delivering
- Research question clearly answered?
- Multiple credible sources consulted?
- Information organized logically?
- Synthesis provided (not just lists)?
- Recommendations are actionable?
- All sources properly cited?
- Report is professional quality?
- Appropriate depth for request?
Efficiency Tips
Use Parallel Tool Calls
DO THIS:
Send one message with multiple WebSearch calls
Send one message with multiple WebFetch callsDON'T DO THIS:
WebSearch, wait for results
WebSearch again, wait for results
WebSearch again, wait for results
(Sequential = slow!)Prioritize Ruthlessly
Focus on:
- Official documentation first
- Most reputable sources
- Recent content
- Directly relevant material
Skip:
- Obviously low-quality content
- Outdated information
- Promotional material
- Tangentially related topics
Know When to Stop
Research has diminishing returns:
- Quick: 5-10 sources is enough
- Standard: 10-15 sources
- Comprehensive: 20-25 sources
- Iterative: 30-50 sources
More sources ≠ better research. Quality over quantity.
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
❌ Don't: Just Summarize Sources
Wrong: "Source 1 says X. Source 2 says Y. Source 3 says Z." Right: "Multiple sources agree that X is best for Y use case, though Z has advantages for specific scenarios [1][2][3]. The key trade-off is..."
❌ Don't: Single Source Dependency
Wrong: Base conclusions on one source Right: Verify important claims across 3+ sources
❌ Don't: Ignore Currency
Wrong: Use 2019 article about 2025 technology Right: Prioritize 2024-2025 content, note when using older sources
❌ Don't: Skip Synthesis
Wrong: List findings without analysis Right: Connect findings, identify patterns, provide insights
❌ Don't: Forget Citations
Wrong: Make claims without sources Right: Cite everything [1]
❌ Don't: Over-Research Trivial Questions
Wrong: 30 sources for "What is React?" Right: 5 sources for simple questions
Integration with Other Skills
With Task Management
- Research technology options
- Create tasks based on research findings
- Link research report in task notes
With Planning
- Research before feature planning
- Use findings to inform PRD
- Base technical decisions on research
With Code Implementation
- Research best practices
- Implement based on findings
- Reference research in code comments
Example Research Report Template
See templates/research_report_template.md for a complete example.
Success Metrics
Research is successful when:
- ✅ User's question is thoroughly answered
- ✅ Multiple authoritative sources consulted
- ✅ Information is synthesized with insights
- ✅ Recommendations are clear and actionable
- ✅ Citations are complete and accurate
- ✅ Report is professional and well-organized
- ✅ Appropriate depth for importance of decision
- ✅ User can make informed decision
Final Checklist
Before delivering research:
- Conducted multi-source search
- Fetched and analyzed quality sources
- Synthesized findings (not just summarized)
- Created comparison tables (if applicable)
- Provided clear recommendations
- Cited all sources properly
- Wrote professional report
- Saved to docs/research/
- Summarized key findings for user
- Offered to answer follow-up questions
Remember
You are Claude - you have excellent research and synthesis capabilities. This skill is just a methodology to apply your abilities systematically. Trust your judgment, be thorough, and provide value through your unique insights and analysis.
No external tools needed - you have WebSearch and WebFetch. That's all you need for comprehensive research.
Quality over quantity - Better to deeply analyze 10 sources than superficially scan 50.
Add value through synthesis - Anyone can collect information. You provide insights, connections, and recommendations.
This is your superpower - Comprehensive, autonomous research that would take a human days, you do in minutes.
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.

