research-types-comparative

A research helper for comparing identifiable options and weighing their trade-offs.

In plain words
What is it for?
It can organize alternatives with weighted decision criteria, strengths and weaknesses, and comparison methods suited to measurable or experience-based questions.
Why use it?
It gives a comparison a structured basis for choosing, instead of treating every difference as equally important.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/p47phoenix/claude-plugins/comparative
Any agent
npx skills add P47Phoenix/Claude-Plugins --skill comparative
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/P47Phoenix/Claude-Plugins

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 78 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,372 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00078 $0.01372
Opus 5 $0.00039 $0.00686
Sonnet 5 $0.00016 $0.00274
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00137

Measured 2d ago against content hash 85a7005ca0db, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

research-types-comparative scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

research-agent/skills/research-types/comparative/SKILL.md · 115 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 115 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Comparative Research Sub-Skill

Router-dispatched paradigm sub-skill for Comparative research. Not directly model-invocable; the research-agent parent loads this sub-skill only when Phase 1 detection classifies the question as Comparative.

When This Sub-Skill Loads

The parent router dispatches here when the input question contains signals like:

  • "Compare X and Y"
  • "Which is better"
  • "Alternatives to X"
  • "Options for X"
  • "X vs. Y"
  • "Trade-offs between"
  • "Choose between"

Disambiguation rule (from research-agent/references/research-type-patterns.md): "Compare X to understand Y" where understanding Y is the goal → Exploratory, not Comparative. Comparison is a method, not the purpose. Only route to Comparative when the user is choosing between identifiable options.

Framework Selection

Framework Use When
PICO Comparing interventions on a measurable outcome (e.g., "Redis vs Memcached for session storage on latency")
None Multi-criteria comparison with no single dominant outcome; use Decision Matrix with weighted criteria

SPICE applies if the comparison is experiential ("from the perspective of senior engineers, async vs sync code review"). PECO is rare — exposure-comparison maps better to Evaluative.

Output Pattern: Decision Matrix

Use this pattern verbatim for the Findings section (parent skill's Phase 6 Synthesis output):

## Research Type: Comparative
## Framework: [None / PICO]

## Options Being Compared
[A], [B], [C]

## Evaluation Criteria (defined before gathering)
| Criterion | Weight | Rationale |
|-----------|--------|-----------|
| ...       | x%     | ...       |

## Decision Matrix
| Criterion | Weight | Option A | Option B | Option C | Evidence [citations] |
|-----------|--------|----------|----------|----------|----------------------|
| ...       | x%     | [score]  | [score]  | [score]  | [S1], [S2]           |

## Dimension Deep-Dives
[For each high-weight criterion: detailed comparison with supporting evidence]

## SWOT per Option (when strategic context applies)
**Option A:** Strengths / Weaknesses / Opportunities / Threats

## Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Necessary conditions for success: [...]
Sufficient conditions for success: [...]

## Recommendation
**Recommended:** [Option X]
**Rationale:** [Why this best fits stated needs - with citations]
**Risk trade-offs:** [What is given up]
**Conditions where this changes:** [Edge cases that favor a different option]

Read the full file on GitHub · 115 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 115 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A 85a7005ca0db

Subscribe to this mod's changes

research-types-comparative is a skill published in the GitHub repository P47Phoenix/Claude-Plugins (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 1,372 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

auto-perf-optimize

Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.

microsoft/vscode · 62 tokens

chat-perf

Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.

microsoft/vscode · 51 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens