| name | deep-research |
| description | Web research with Graph-of-Thoughts for fast-changing topics. Use when user requests research, analysis, investigation, or comparison requiring current information. Features hypothesis testing, source triangulation, claim verification, Red Team, self-critique, and gap analysis. Supports Quick/Standard/Deep/Exhaustive tiers. Creative Mode for cross-industry innovation. |
Deep Research
Enhanced research engine for topics where training data is outdated.
Quick Start
Standard Mode
CLASSIFY → LANDSCAPE SCAN → SCOPE → HYPOTHESIZE → PLAN → [PLAN PREVIEW*] → RETRIEVE
→ GAP ANALYSIS → TRIANGULATE → SYNTHESIZE → RED TEAM → SELF-CRITIQUE → PACKAGE
*Deep+ tier only
LANDSCAPE SCAN (MANDATORY - Before Anything Else)
[Search for OVERVIEW first - NO known entity names in query!]
WebSearch: "[topic] landscape overview [current year]"
WebSearch: "top [topic] list [current year]"
WebSearch: "[topic] ecosystem players [current year]"
❌ WRONG: "DeepSeek Qwen performance 2025" (uses names you already know)
✅ RIGHT: "China open source LLM models list 2025" (discovers what exists)
→ Extract ALL entity names from results
→ List: Discovered (new to you) vs Confirmed (you knew)
→ THEN proceed to SCOPE with complete picture
Why: You cannot research what you don't know exists. Scan the landscape FIRST.
Creative Mode
ABSTRACT → MAP (3-5 domains) → SEARCH → GENERALIZE → SYNTHESIZE
Trigger: "creative mode", "cross-industry", "what do others do"
Classification
| Type | When | Process |
|---|
| A | Single fact | WebSearch → Answer |
| B | Multi-fact | 3 phases |
| C | Judgment needed | 6 phases |
| D | Novel/conflicting | Full + Red Team |
Intensity Tiers
| Tier | Sources | When |
|---|
| Quick | 5-10 | Simple question |
| Standard | 10-20 | Multi-faceted |
| Deep | 20-30 | Novel, high stakes |
| Exhaustive | 30+ | Critical decision |
Core Rules
Parallel Search (MANDATORY)
[Single message]
WebSearch: "[topic] 2025"
WebSearch: "[topic] limitations"
WebSearch: "[topic] vs alternatives"
Claim Types
| Type | Requirements |
|---|
| C1 | Quote + 2+ sources + confidence + reasoning |
| C2 | Citation required |
| C3 | Cite if contested |
Confidence Format (C1 claims)
**Claim:** [Statement]
**Confidence:** HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW
**Reason:** [Why]
**Sources:** [1][2]
Anti-Hallucination
- Every C1 cites [N] immediately
- Use "According to [1]..."
- Admit: "No sources found for X"
URL Fallback
If WebFetch returns 403:
curl -s --max-time 60 "https://r.jina.ai/https://example.com"
GitHub Repository Research
When research reveals interesting GitHub repositories that could provide deeper insights:
-
ASK user before cloning:
"เจอ repo ที่น่าสนใจ: [repo-name] — ต้องการให้ clone มาศึกษา code โดยละเอียดไหมคะ?"
-
If user agrees, clone to dedicated research folder:
mkdir -p /mnt/d/githubresearch && cd /mnt/d/githubresearch && git clone [repo-url]
-
Key files to read:
package.json / pyproject.toml — dependencies, entry pointssrc/index.ts or src/main.py — main logicsrc/types/ — data structuresREADME.md — overview
Why: Cloned repos allow deeper code analysis than WebFetch summaries.
Finding Details in References
Scripts
| Script | Purpose |
|---|
scripts/validate_report.py | 9-check quality validation |
Output File (MANDATORY)
After completing research, ALWAYS save to markdown file:
research/[topic-slug]-[YYYY-MM-DD].md
Example: research/china-opensource-ai-2025-01-04.md
- Create
research/ folder if it doesn't exist
- Why: Research takes effort. Save it for future reference.
Related Skills
| When | Skill |
|---|
| Cross-industry innovation | /generate-creative-ideas |
| Technical contradiction | /triz |
| Explain findings | /explain-concepts |
| Strategic analysis | /manage-business-strategy |
