context-gathering

name	context-gathering
description	Guides multi-pass codebase research using semantic search, grep, and file exploration. Produces structured context maps with primary files, secondary files, patterns, and implementation sequences. Use when researching a codebase before implementation.
disable-model-invocation	true
argument-hint	Feature or area of codebase to research
tags	["agloop","research","codebase","search","exploration"]

Context Gathering

When to Use This Skill

Load this skill when:

• Researching a codebase before creating an implementation plan (Researcher agent)
• Gathering context for a specific task during execution (Executor, if unfamiliar area)
• Building a context map of file relationships and patterns
• Determining the complexity level for a feature request

Multi-Pass Research Methodology

Research uses 1-3 passes depending on complexity. Each pass builds on the previous one's findings.

Pass 1: Broad Semantic Search (Always Required)

Goal: Understand the project architecture, directory structure, framework, and high-level patterns.

Actions:

1. Project structure scan — list_dir on root, src/, and key directories
2. Framework detection — Read package.json, tsconfig.json, framework configs
3. Architecture overview — semantic_search for main entry points, routing, data flow
4. Existing conventions — Identify naming patterns, file organization, import style
5. Key configuration — Read environment configs, build configs, database configs

Search queries for Pass 1:

semantic_search: "main entry point application setup"
semantic_search: "routing configuration endpoints"
semantic_search: "database connection configuration"
file_search: "**/*.config.*"
file_search: "**/package.json"

Output from Pass 1:

• Framework and language identified
• Directory structure mapped
• Key config files listed
• Initial patterns observed
• Areas of interest flagged for Pass 2

Pass 2: Targeted Grep (Medium+ Complexity)

Goal: Find specific patterns, function signatures, import chains, error handling conventions, and configuration details relevant to the feature.

Actions:

1. Pattern matching — grep_search for specific function names, types, interfaces
2. Import chain tracing — Find who imports what, dependency relationships
3. Error handling patterns — How errors are handled in similar code
4. Test patterns — What testing framework, test structure, mock patterns
5. Similar features — Find existing code that does something similar to the requested feature

Search queries for Pass 2:

grep_search: "export function|export const|export class" (in target directory)
grep_search: "import.*from.*{target_module}"
grep_search: "catch|throw|Error" (in relevant files)
grep_search: "describe|it|test|expect" (in test files)
file_search: "**/*.test.*" or "**/*.spec.*"

Output from Pass 2:

• Specific functions and types cataloged
• Import dependency graph for relevant modules
• Error handling conventions documented
• Test patterns identified
• Similar existing features found (with file paths)

Pass 3: Deep Read (Complex Features Only)

Goal: Deeply understand critical files, trace data flow through the system, and examine edge cases.

Actions:

1. Critical file examination — use the workspace file-read tool on every primary file, line-by-line
2. Data flow tracing — Follow data from API entry point through business logic to persistence
3. State management analysis — How state flows, where mutations happen, what triggers updates
4. Edge case discovery — Boundary conditions, error paths, race conditions
5. Integration points — External APIs, databases, message queues, file systems

Output from Pass 3:

• Detailed understanding of each critical file's purpose and structure
• Data flow diagram (conceptual)
• State management patterns documented
• Edge cases and potential issues identified
• Integration point contracts documented

Complexity Detection

Determine the research depth needed before starting:

Simple (1 Pass)

Indicators:

• Small change to a well-understood area
• Familiar patterns (e.g., add another CRUD endpoint like existing ones)
• Modifying 1-2 files
• Clear, direct implementation path

Examples: Add a config value, create a utility function matching existing patterns, update a type definition.

Medium (2 Passes)

Indicators:

• New feature area with some unknowns
• Moderate number of files (3-5)
• Need to understand existing patterns before implementing
• Some integration with existing systems

Examples: New API endpoint with validation and database interaction, component with state management, middleware addition.

Complex (3 Passes)

Indicators:

• Cross-cutting concern affecting multiple subsystems
• Large feature with many dependencies
• Unfamiliar codebase or technology
• Integration with external systems
• Security-sensitive functionality

Examples: Authentication system, search with indexing, real-time data sync, payment processing.

Search Strategy Hierarchy

Use tools in this priority order — start with the highest applicable tool:

Priority	Tool	Best For	When to Use
1	semantic_search	Conceptual understanding	"Find code that handles authentication"
2	grep_search	Exact patterns	"Find all files importing UserService"
3	file_search	File discovery	"Find all test files"
4	File read tool	Deep understanding	"Understand this specific file's logic"
5	list_dir	Structure mapping	"What's in the src/api/ directory?"

Rules:

• Start broad (semantic), narrow down (grep), then deep dive (read)
• Parallelize independent searches in the same pass
• Deduplicate results between passes — don't re-search what you already found
• Stop when you have sufficient confidence — more research has diminishing returns

Context Map Output Format

The researcher must produce a structured context map in this format:

context_map:
  primary_files:
    - path: "src/api/handlers/search.ts"
      role: "Main handler for search endpoint — this is where the new feature will be added"
      key_exports:
        - "searchHandler"
        - "SearchOptions"
    - path: "src/services/searchService.ts"
      role: "Business logic layer for search — orchestrates query building and result formatting"
      key_exports:
        - "SearchService"
        - "performSearch"

  secondary_files:
    - path: "src/middleware/auth.ts"
      role: "Authentication middleware — search endpoint must use this"
    - path: "src/types/api.ts"
      role: "Shared API types — add new SearchRequest/SearchResponse types here"
    - path: "src/config/routes.ts"
      role: "Route configuration — register new endpoint here"

  test_files:
    - path: "src/api/handlers/__tests__/search.test.ts"
      coverage: "Unit tests for search handler — 4 existing tests"
    - path: "tests/integration/api/search.integration.test.ts"
       

  
      
       
       
      
       
       
      
       
       

  
     
     
     
     
     

Hybrid Retrieval Pattern

The recommended approach combines multiple search tools for comprehensive coverage:

1. SEMANTIC SEARCH — Find conceptually related code
   → "authentication middleware", "search implementation"
   → Produces: initial file list with relevance scores

2. GREP SEARCH — Find exact patterns and references
   → "import.*SearchService", "export.*search"
   → Produces: precise file matches, line numbers

3. MERGE & DEDUPLICATE — Combine results
   → Remove duplicate file paths
   → Rank by: appeared in both searches > semantic only > grep only

4. RELATIONSHIP DISCOVERY — Map connections
   → For each primary file: who imports it? what does it import?
   → Build informal dependency graph

5. READ IMPORTANT FILES — Deep examination
   → Read primary files and key secondary files
   → Understand implementation details, not just signatures

6. ANALYZE GAPS — Identify what's missing
   → Are there areas the feature touches that weren't covered?
   → Are there patterns used elsewhere that weren't found?
   → Any external dependencies or config not yet examined?

7. REPORT — Structured output
   → Context map in the format above
   → Findings summary
   → Confidence assessment

Structured Research Output

The full research output follows this format:

research_output:
  tldr: "One-sentence summary of findings, e.g., 'Express API with PostgreSQL, uses repository pattern, auth via JWT middleware'"

  research_metadata:
    confidence: "high" # low | medium | high
    coverage: "85%" # estimated % of relevant code examined
    gaps:
      - "Did not examine WebSocket integration — may be relevant if real-time search is needed"
    passes_completed: 2

  context_map:
    # ... (full context map as shown above)

  findings:
    architecture_notes: |
      Express API with layered architecture: handlers → services → repositories.
      PostgreSQL via Prisma ORM. Redis for caching. JWT auth middleware on all protected routes.
    dependencies:
      - "prisma 5.x — ORM for database access"
      - "zod 3.x — input validation in handlers"
      - "redis 4.x — response caching"
    constraints:
      - "All endpoints must go through auth middleware"
      - "Database queries must use Prisma (no raw SQL)"
      - "Response format must match existing { data, meta, error } envelope"
    risks:
      - "Search on large datasets may need database indexing"
      - "Full-text search may require PostgreSQL tsvector or Elasticsearch"

  open_questions:
    - "Should search results be cached? If so, what TTL?"
     

Verification

Research is complete and valid when:

1. Confidence ≥ medium: Researcher has enough context to support planning
2. Coverage ≥ 70%: Most relevant code areas have been examined
3. Gaps documented: Any unexamined areas are explicitly listed
4. Context map populated: Primary files, secondary files, and patterns are identified
5. Sequence suggested: An ordered implementation approach is proposed
6. Patterns found: At least one existing pattern to follow is identified with an example file
7. No fabricated files: Every file path in the context map actually exists in the workspace
8. Findings coherent: Architecture notes, dependencies, and constraints are consistent with each other
9. Open questions listed: Unresolved ambiguities are documented, not ignored
10. Pass count matches complexity: Simple → 1 pass, Medium → 2 passes, Complex → 3 passes