Agent skill

researching

Use when requirements are fuzzy, multiple technical approaches exist, or change affects architecture, API, data, or security

Stars 163
Forks 31

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)

  1. Clarify & Frame — purpose, constraints, success criteria
  2. Collect Signals — code, docs, history
  3. Options + Decision — 2-3 options, pick one
  4. 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?

Be as detailed as possible for better results