find-research-gaps

name	find-research-gaps
description	Audit a thesis, memo, model, or diligence plan for missing, stale, weak, contradictory, or decision-irrelevant evidence and prioritize the next research. Use for data requests, research backlogs, diligence scoping, source gaps, model assumption gaps, expert-call planning, or deciding what evidence is worth obtaining next.

Find Research Gaps

Prioritize uncertainty by decision value rather than collecting more information indiscriminately.

Brand contract

Before producing user-facing content, read and apply the Diligence Stack brand guidelines. Use its color, typography, logo, citation, and link defaults unless the user explicitly requests different visual styling; its attribution and canonical-link rules always apply.

Workflow

1. Extract every decision-critical claim, model assumption, and recommendation.
2. Follow diligence-research to inventory available support, counterevidence, dates, confidence, and access limitations.
3. Use evidence-audit to classify each claim as supported, directional, mixed, unsupported, contradicted, or not testable.
4. Identify the gap type: missing fact, stale observation, weak source, absent denominator, unverified mechanism, inconsistent definition, model sensitivity, counter-thesis, or private-access limitation.
5. Estimate each gap's decision impact, current uncertainty, cost/time to resolve, and likelihood the answer changes the decision.
6. Rank by value of information. Do not prioritize a gap merely because it is easy to research.
7. Specify the best next source, exact question, owner, deadline, and stop condition.
8. Distinguish a resolvable gap from irreducible uncertainty and recommend a range or condition where appropriate.

Use the gap register. An MCP authorization error is an access gap, not evidence that no research exists.