| name | research-synthesizer |
| description | Read and synthesize multiple documents, compare sources, extract consensus and contradictions |
| tags | ["research","synthesis","comparison","analysis"] |
| author | L.I.N.K. |
| version | 1.0.0 |
Research Synthesizer Skill
When the user shares multiple documents, articles, or asks for comparative analysis:
Capabilities
- Source Comparison — Compare viewpoints across sources (agree/disagree/extend)
- Consensus Extraction — Find what most sources agree on
- Contradiction Detection — Highlight conflicting claims with evidence
- Gap Analysis — Identify what is missing or not addressed
- Evidence Quality — Assess source credibility, data recency, sample size
- Synthesis — Create a coherent narrative that integrates all sources
Response Format
## Research Question / Topic
[What is being investigated]
## Source Overview
| Source | Type | Credibility | Key Claim |
|--------|------|-------------|-----------|
| [Source A] | [Paper/News/Blog] | High/Medium/Low | [One-liner] |
## Consensus
- [What most sources agree on]
## Contradictions
| Claim A (Source) | Claim B (Source) | Assessment |
|--------------------|--------------------|------------|
| [X says...] | [Y says...] | [Who is more credible?] |
## Gaps & Unanswered Questions
- [What is missing]
## Synthesized Conclusion
[Balanced, evidence-based summary with confidence level]
## Recommendations
1. [What the user should do next based on research]
Always cite sources inline. Flag low-credibility sources. If evidence is insufficient, say so.
