Agent skill

deep-research

Use when researching complex topics, evaluating technologies, investigating domains, or answering multi-faceted questions requiring web research. Triggers: 'research X', 'investigate Y', 'evaluate options for Z', 'what are the best approaches to', 'help me understand', 'deep dive into', 'compare alternatives', 'look into', 'find out about'. NOT for: exploring design approaches (use brainstorming) or domain modeling (use analyzing-domains).

Stars 5
Forks 2

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/axiomantic/spellbook/tree/main/skills/deep-research

SKILL.md

Deep Research

Announce: "Using deep-research skill for multi-threaded investigation with verification."

Invariant Principles

  1. Tag Every Claim: No finding without confidence level + source URL
  2. Surface Every Conflict: When sources disagree, document both positions
  3. Respect the User's Frame: When research contradicts user-provided facts, STOP and surface conflict via AskUserQuestion. Never silently override.
  4. Verify Before Synthesizing: All findings pass through fact-checking and dehallucination

Inputs/Outputs

Input Required Description
user_request Yes Research question, topic, or comparison request
depth No quick (1-2 rounds), standard (3-5), exhaustive (6+)

Artifacts at ~/.local/spellbook/docs/<project-encoded>/research-<topic-slug>/: research-brief.md, research-plan.md, micro-reports/, verified-claims.md, research-report.md

Registries

Subject Registry: Track all named entities from request. Each must get >= 1 round. If any subject has 0 rounds after 50% of budget, FORCE a dedicated round.

Conflict Register: Log when sources disagree {claim, source_a, source_b, status: OPEN|RESOLVED|FLAGGED}. All must be RESOLVED or FLAGGED before Phase 4. Choosing one side without citation is FORBIDDEN.

Confidence Tags: VERIFIED (primary source URL) | CORROBORATED (2+ independent) | PLAUSIBLE (consistent, unconfirmed) | INFERRED (derived logically) | UNVERIFIED (no source) | CONTESTED (sources disagree)

Plateau Breaker: URL overlap >= 60% or 0 new facts for 2 rounds triggers: L1 query reformulation, L2 source type change, L3 STOP and report gaps. Hard limit: 3 stale rounds = mandatory L3.

Phases

# Name Executor Gate
0 Interview /deep-research-interview Subjects registered, success criteria defined
1 Plan /deep-research-plan Threads independent, all subjects assigned
2 Investigate Parallel subagents x /deep-research-investigate All threads complete, coverage met
3 Verify fact-checking + dehallucination skills No REFUTED claims, CONTESTED flagged
4 Synthesize Orchestrator Report passes completeness check

Phase 0: Interview

What is the user actually asking? What named entities appear? What do they already know?

Execute: /deep-research-interview with user's request and constraints. Output: research-brief.md — refined question, subject registry, success criteria, depth. Gate: All subjects registered, research type classified, brief written.

Phase 1: Plan

Execute: /deep-research-plan with research brief. Output: research-plan.md — thread definitions, source strategies, round budgets. Gate: Threads independent, all subjects assigned, convergence criteria set.

Phase 2: Investigate (Parallel)

Threads independent? Each subagent has complete context? CURRENT_AGENT_TYPE set?

Dispatch one subagent per thread:

Task(description="Investigate: <thread>", subagent_type=CURRENT_AGENT_TYPE,
  prompt="Execute /deep-research-investigate. Thread: <def>. Budget: <N>.
  Brief: <summary>. Write micro-reports to <path>. Apply confidence tags,
  conflict register, plateau breaker.")

Gate: All threads returned, every subject has >= 1 round, conflicts consolidated.

Phase 3: Verify

Dispatch fact-checking subagent on micro-reports/*.md (SourceCredibility, CrossReference, DateValidity agents). Then dispatch dehallucination on verified-claims.md for precision fabrication and source conflation.

Gate: All claims have verdicts, no REFUTED presented as fact, dehallucination passed.

Phase 4: Synthesize

Research Type Structure
Comparison Side-by-side matrix, winner per criterion, trade-offs
Procedural Step-by-step guide, prerequisites, decision points
Exploratory Landscape overview, taxonomy, key players, trends
Evaluative Criteria, scoring, recommendation with caveats

Reorder to reader-logical order, apply confidence tags inline, build bibliography, insert FLAGGED conflicts with both positions. Run completeness check against research-brief.success_criteria; if gaps: dispatch targeted Phase 2 (max 1 loop) or acknowledge gaps.

Gate: Success criteria addressed, all subjects in report, bibliography complete.

Circuit Breakers

Trigger Action
Phase 0 fails STOP. Cannot proceed without scope.
All threads plateau L3 Report partial findings as incomplete.
>50% claims REFUTED Restart Phase 1 with revised plan.
>30% gaps at Phase 4 Loop to Phase 2 (max 1 loop).

<FINAL_EMPHASIS> Research is only as valuable as its honesty. Tag uncertainty. Surface conflicts. Acknowledge gaps. Fabrication is unrecoverable. Honest incompleteness is always preferable. </FINAL_EMPHASIS>

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

axiomantic/spellbook

spellbook-auditing

Meta-audit skill for spellbook development. Spawns parallel subagents to factcheck docs, optimize instructions, find token savings, and identify MCP candidates. Produces actionable report.

5 2
Explore
axiomantic/spellbook

documentation-updates

Use after modifying library skills, library commands, or agents to ensure CHANGELOG, README, and docs are updated

5 2
Explore
axiomantic/spellbook

project-encyclopedia

[DEPRECATED] Use project-level AGENTS.md files instead. Previously used for first-session codebase onboarding and persistent glossary creation.

5 2
Explore
axiomantic/spellbook

reviewing-impl-plans

Use when reviewing implementation plans before execution. Triggers: 'is this plan solid', 'review the plan', 'check before I start building', 'anything missing from this plan', 'will this plan work', 'audit the implementation plan'. NOT for: reviewing design documents (use reviewing-design-docs) or creating plans (use writing-plans).

5 2
Explore
axiomantic/spellbook

session-resume

Session resume protocol and session repairs handling. Loaded when spellbook_session_init returns resume_available: true, or when session_init returns a repairs array. Triggers: 'resume', 'continue', 'where were we', session resume, session repairs.

5 2
Explore
axiomantic/spellbook

brainstorming

Use when exploring design approaches, generating ideas, or making architectural decisions. Triggers: 'explore options', 'what are the tradeoffs', 'how should I approach', 'let's think through', 'sketch out an approach', 'I need ideas for', 'how would you structure', 'what are my options'. Also invoked by develop when design decisions are needed.

5 2
Explore

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results