research-brief

research-brief

Research is hard to audit when links appear only after the answer is drafted. This skill keeps the question, sources, claims, conflicts, and support check visible from the first search through the final brief.

Core principle: acquire evidence before synthesis, map each factual claim to the material that supports or contradicts it, and leave gaps visible.

Read-only. Do not mutate a repository, publish, message anyone, or promote findings into memory. Those actions require a separate request. This skill does not require a particular service, provider, model, runtime, citation style, or manuscript format.

Procedure

1. Scope the question before searching. Restate:

   • the research question;
   • the decision boundary, including what choice or factual conclusion the brief may inform;
   • the freshness requirement, including relevant dates or versions;
   • the stop condition, such as enough direct evidence for each material claim, a time limit, a source limit, or a named unresolved gap.

2. Create a small query map. Split the question into the fewest subquestions needed to answer it. For each subquestion, name the evidence sought and the preferred source type. Prefer primary documentation, original datasets, standards, and papers when they answer the claim directly. Use secondary sources to locate, explain, or challenge primary material, not as a silent substitute for it.

3. Maintain a source register while gathering. Give each source a stable identifier such as S1. Record:

   source_id:
   title:
   url_or_local_ref:
   publisher:
   publication_or_update_date:
   source_type:
   supports_part:
   version_applicability:
   access_status:
   

   Use unknown when a date is unavailable. For time-sensitive questions, check the publication or update date and confirm that the source applies to the relevant product version, policy period, dataset release, or standard revision. Record missing and inaccessible sources instead of guessing their contents.