بنقرة واحدة
gsd-research-phase
Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use /gsd-plan-phase instead)
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
القائمة
Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use /gsd-plan-phase instead)
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Design thinking and decision-making for web UI. Use when designing components, layouts, color schemes, typography, or creating aesthetic interfaces. Teaches principles, not fixed values.
Add an idea to the backlog parking lot (999.x numbering)
Add phase to end of current milestone in roadmap
Capture idea or task as todo from current conversation context
Autonomous audit-to-fix pipeline — find issues, classify, fix, test, commit
Audit milestone completion against original intent before archiving
| name | gsd-research-phase |
| description | Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use /gsd-plan-phase instead) |
Note: This is a standalone research command. For most workflows, use /gsd-plan-phase which integrates research automatically.
Use this command when:
Orchestrator role: Parse phase, validate against roadmap, check existing research, gather context, spawn researcher agent, present results.
Why subagent: Research burns context fast (WebSearch, Context7 queries, source verification). Fresh 200k context for investigation. Main context stays lean for user interaction.
<available_agent_types> Valid GSD subagent types (use exact names — do not fall back to 'general-purpose'):
Normalize phase input in step 1 before any directory lookups.
INIT=$(node ".agent/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" init phase-op "$ARGUMENTS")
if [[ "$INIT" == @file:* ]]; then INIT=$(cat "${INIT#@file:}"); fi
Extract from init JSON: phase_dir, phase_number, phase_name, phase_found, commit_docs, has_research, state_path, requirements_path, context_path, research_path.
Resolve researcher model:
RESEARCHER_MODEL=$(node ".agent/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" resolve-model gsd-phase-researcher --raw)
PHASE_INFO=$(node ".agent/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" roadmap get-phase "${phase_number}")
If found is false: Error and exit. If found is true: Extract phase_number, phase_name, goal from JSON.
ls .planning/phases/${PHASE}-*/RESEARCH.md 2>/dev/null
If exists: Offer: 1) Update research, 2) View existing, 3) Skip. Wait for response.
If doesn't exist: Continue.
Use paths from INIT (do not inline file contents in orchestrator context):
requirements_pathcontext_pathstate_pathPresent summary with phase description and what files the researcher will load.
Research modes: ecosystem (default), feasibility, implementation, comparison.
<research_type>
Phase Research — investigating HOW to implement a specific phase well.
</research_type>
<key_insight>
The question is NOT "which library should I use?"
The question is: "What do I not know that I don't know?"
For this phase, discover:
- What's the established architecture pattern?
- What libraries form the standard stack?
- What problems do people commonly hit?
- What's SOTA vs what the agent's training thinks is SOTA?
- What should NOT be hand-rolled?
</key_insight>
<objective>
Research implementation approach for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
Mode: ecosystem
</objective>
<files_to_read>
- {requirements_path} (Requirements)
- {context_path} (Phase context from discuss-phase, if exists)
- {state_path} (Prior project decisions and blockers)
</files_to_read>
<additional_context>
**Phase description:** {phase_description}
</additional_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your RESEARCH.md will be loaded by `/gsd-plan-phase` which uses specific sections:
- `## Standard Stack` → Plans use these libraries
- `## Architecture Patterns` → Task structure follows these
- `## Don't Hand-Roll` → Tasks NEVER build custom solutions for listed problems
- `## Common Pitfalls` → Verification steps check for these
- `## Code Examples` → Task actions reference these patterns
Be prescriptive, not exploratory. "Use X" not "Consider X or Y."
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
Before declaring complete, verify:
- [ ] All domains investigated (not just some)
- [ ] Negative claims verified with official docs
- [ ] Multiple sources for critical claims
- [ ] Confidence levels assigned honestly
- [ ] Section names match what plan-phase expects
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md
</output>
Task(
prompt=filled_prompt,
subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
model="{researcher_model}",
description="Research Phase {phase}"
)
## RESEARCH COMPLETE: Display summary, offer: Plan phase, Dig deeper, Review full, Done.
## CHECKPOINT REACHED: Present to user, get response, spawn continuation.
## RESEARCH INCONCLUSIVE: Show what was attempted, offer: Add context, Try different mode, Manual.
<objective>
Continue research for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
</objective>
<prior_state>
<files_to_read>
- .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md (Existing research)
</files_to_read>
</prior_state>
<checkpoint_response>
**Type:** {checkpoint_type}
**Response:** {user_response}
</checkpoint_response>
Task(
prompt=continuation_prompt,
subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
model="{researcher_model}",
description="Continue research Phase {phase}"
)
<success_criteria>