Agent skill
researching
Use when requirements are fuzzy, multiple technical approaches exist, or change affects architecture, API, data, or security
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/data/researching
SKILL.md
Researching Skill
Use when the how is unclear; output is a chosen approach with evidence.
Prerequisites: If what/why is unclear, use discovering skill first.
Quick Reference
| Track | When | Output |
|---|---|---|
| Fast (default) | Standard decisions | Brief: problem, decision, risks |
| Full | API/security/multi-subsystem | Research brief + optional design doc |
When to Use
- Requirements are fuzzy or incomplete
- Multiple plausible approaches exist (spike, proof of concept needed)
- Change affects architecture, API, data, or security
Skip if: obvious bug, trivial change, pattern already exists.
Fast vs Full Track
Is it high-risk?
├── No → Fast Track (default)
└── Yes → Full Track
├── Changes public API
├── Security/data implications
├── Team disagreement
└── Touches multiple subsystems
Core Rule
Evidence before opinions. Never recommend anything until facts are gathered: what already exists in code, which constraints are real, what decisions were made before. If evidence is missing — label it as assumption and lower confidence.
Quick Rules
- One question at a time while clarifying requirements
- If multiple interpretations exist, clarify before researching
- State assumptions explicitly with confidence (H/M/L)
When to Ask vs Act
Ask (one question at a time; prefer multiple choice) if:
- Multiple interpretations
- Critical context missing
- Answer would change direction
Act (state assumptions + confidence) if:
- Default interpretation is clear
- Request is specific
- Assumptions are easy to verify
Workflow
Fast Track (default)
- Clarify & Frame — purpose, constraints, success criteria
- Collect Signals — code, docs, history
- Options + Decision — 2-3 options, pick one
- Brief — Problem (1-2 sentences), Decision, Key Risks (1-3 bullets)
Full Track
| Phase | Focus | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 0. Frame | Problem, non-goals, success criteria | Constraints |
| 1. Signals | Code, docs, history | Current state + assumptions |
| 2. Options | 2-4 approaches with trade-offs | Comparison |
| 3. Evaluate | Decide using Phase 0 criteria | Recommendation + fallback plan |
| 4. Artifacts | Research brief (always) | Optional: design doc |
Research Brief template: Problem & Context → Constraints → Current State → Options Compared → Recommendation → Risks
Stop Conditions
Stop research when:
- Decision criteria are satisfied
- Remaining unknowns won't change the decision
- Next step is prototype/measurement
Best Practices
- Assumptions + Confidence — label assumptions (H/M/L), propose quick validation
- Spike as Research — 30-90 min spike with clear question and success metric
- Checkpoints (Full Track) — after each phase: "Constraints complete? Which risks matter?"
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| Recommend without evidence | Gather facts first, then opinions |
| Single option, no alternatives | Always 2-3 options with trade-offs |
| Drift into tangential topics | Stay connected to problem statement |
| Hide uncertainty behind confidence | State unknowns explicitly |
| Finalize with disputed framing | Resolve framing first |
Didn't find tool you were looking for?