agentleFS
wrm3wrm3/ai_project_template/.claude/skills/deep-research/skill.md

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

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

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
  1. Distinctive:

    When a user needs comprehensive research:

    line 11
  2. Distinctive:

    How deep: should the research be? (mode selection)

    line 54
  3. Distinctive:

    Comparison factors: If comparing options, what criteria matter?

    line 64
  4. Distinctive:

    Create search query variations:

    line 68
  5. Distinctive:

    Don't just summarize: - add value through:

    line 172
  6. Distinctive:

    Every research report should include:

    line 182
  7. Distinctive:

    When to use each

    line 231
  8. Distinctive:

    Use cases and benefits

    line 374
  9. Distinctive:

    Right: Verify important claims across 3+ sources

    line 532
  10. Distinctive:

    Wrong: Use 2019 article about 2025 technology

    line 535
  11. Distinctive:

    Create tasks based on research findings

    line 554
  12. Distinctive:

    Use findings to inform PRD

    line 559

“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

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:

  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

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:

  1. Official documentation (.org, official project sites)
  2. Reputable technical sites (MDN, CSS-Tricks, Smashing Magazine, web.dev)
  3. Well-known blogs (Vercel, Netlify, major tech companies)
  4. Recent articles (2024-2025)
  5. 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-zustand

8. 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].md

Example:

docs/research/react_state_management_20251020_143022.md

Research Workflow Examples

Example 1: Technology Comparison

User: "Compare React state management solutions"

Your Process:

  1. Plan (30 seconds):
    • Research Redux, Zustand, Jotai, MobX, React Context
    • Compare: complexity, performance, use cases, ecosystem
    • Mode: Comprehensive (user wants thorough comparison)
  2. 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"
  3. 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
  4. Analyze (10 minutes):
    • Create comparison matrix
    • Identify use cases for each
    • Note pros/cons
    • Synthesize recommendations
  5. 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:

  1. Plan:
    • Research REST, GraphQL, design patterns
    • Find industry standards
    • Mode: Standard (typical request)
  2. Search:
    - "API design best practices 2025"
    - "REST API design principles"
    - "API design patterns"
    - "API security best practices"
  3. Fetch (12 sources):
    • Industry standards (OpenAPI, JSON:API)
    • Expert blog posts
    • Company engineering blogs
    • Official documentation
  4. Analyze:
    • Identify common patterns
    • Note industry consensus
    • Extract specific guidelines
  5. 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:

  1. Plan:
    • Understand architecture
    • How they work
    • Use cases and benefits
    • Mode: Comprehensive
  2. 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"
  3. Fetch (20 sources):
    • Official React docs (primary)
    • React team blog posts
    • Next.js documentation
    • Technical deep dives
    • Real-world examples
  4. Analyze:
    • How RSC works (architecture)
    • Benefits and trade-offs
    • Use cases
    • Integration patterns
  5. 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

  1. Broad searches to understand landscape
  2. Fetch 5-8 overview sources
  3. 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:

  1. Targeted searches
  2. Fetch 5-8 sources per section
  3. Detailed analysis
  4. Section write-up

Phase 4: Synthesis

  1. Combine all sections
  2. Add cross-references
  3. Create comprehensive document
  4. 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 calls

DON'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

  1. Research technology options
  2. Create tasks based on research findings
  3. Link research report in task notes

With Planning

  1. Research before feature planning
  2. Use findings to inform PRD
  3. Base technical decisions on research

With Code Implementation

  1. Research best practices
  2. Implement based on findings
  3. 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.

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.