Do deep research and synthesize it into one logically structured article with clear thesis, argument flow, evidence, objections, and takeaways. By default, this skill requires internet source collection and deep reading before drafting. Use when the user wants a strong reasoning artifact first: sermon notes, Bible passage study, policy/tech explainers, product narratives, or any topic where downstream artifacts should start from an approved article.
Do deep research and synthesize it into one logically structured article with clear thesis, argument flow, evidence, objections, and takeaways. By default, this skill requires internet source collection and deep reading before drafting. Use when the user wants a strong reasoning artifact first: sermon notes, Bible passage study, policy/tech explainers, product narratives, or any topic where downstream artifacts should start from an approved article.
Deep Research Article
Overview (primary artifact)
Produce:
article.md: one coherent article with strong reasoning and transitions
This skill is intentionally topic-agnostic.
If the user later wants an image-only deck, pass the approved article directly to infographic-powerpoint-deck, which can ingest raw articles or structured slide tables.
In internet-backed mode, also produce a research package:
source_dossier.md
evidence_extract.md
research_notes.md
claim_evidence_ledger.md
Workflow
Step 0 — Confirm constraints and research mode
Ask only what’s necessary:
Audience + use case (sermon, lesson, blog, internal memo)
Desired length (minutes or word count)
Language (CN/EN/bilingual) and tone (academic / pastoral / simple)
Success criteria (what a “good final article” must achieve for this user)
Explicit non-goals/out-of-scope topics to prevent drift
For Bible: translation/version and whether to include cross-references
Must-use sources or explicit constraints (paywalled-only, region scope, date range)
Whether web research is prohibited by user/policy
Default mode is internet-backed deep research. Only skip internet if user explicitly asks for no-web research.
If the user does not specify a length, do default to a short article. Read and use the long-form depth defaults there.
not
references/longform_depth_standard.md
Step 1 — Internet source sweep (required by default)
Follow references/web_research_protocol.md and create source_dossier.md using references/source_dossier_template.md.
Minimum source counts:
Normal: at least 8 sources
Deep: at least 12 sources
Coverage requirements:
At least 2 source types (e.g., primary + secondary)
At least 2 sources that present meaningful tension/alternative interpretation
For time-sensitive topics: include recent sources and clearly note dates
Drafting is blocked until this step is complete.
Step 1a — No-web fallback (only when explicitly requested)
If the user explicitly forbids web research:
Use only provided/local materials.
Build source_dossier.md from local sources.
Mark mode as no-web constrained in the dossier.
Keep the same extraction/ledger/QA flow, but clearly flag evidence limits in the article.
Step 1b — Evidence extraction (deep reading)
Create evidence_extract.md from the dossier using references/evidence_extraction_template.md.
Identify “center of gravity” (main burden) and what the text is not saying.
Step 1c — Research notes (synthesis scratchpad)
Create research_notes.md using references/research_notes_template.md:
key definitions
observations from sources/text
competing interpretations
load-bearing facts with source IDs
open questions
Step 1d — Claim→evidence ledger (required)
Before drafting, build claim_evidence_ledger.md:
Use references/claim_evidence_ledger_template.md.
Every major claim must have at least one evidence anchor and source ID.
Mark confidence and disconfirmation condition.
Step 2 — Argument outline (the real engine)
Write an outline that is easy to defend:
Thesis (one sentence)
Mainline statement (one sentence): what the article must prove for this user, and what is explicitly out of scope
3–6 supporting moves (each is a claim → evidence → implication)
Guardrails: what to omit, what not to overclaim
Transition logic: why move A leads to move B
Before drafting, run a quick outline challenge:
For each move, state “if removed, what breaks?”
Remove or merge moves that don’t break anything important.
Step 3 — Draft article.md
Use the skeleton in references/article_skeleton.md.
Also read references/longform_depth_standard.md.
Rules:
Prefer short paragraphs with explicit signposting (“因此/所以/因为/然而”).
Separate observation vs application.
Include explicit citations (source IDs and links) for load-bearing claims.
Default to a substantial long-form article unless the user explicitly asked for a brief.
Integrate evidence into the body itself. Do not outsource the reasoning to a references section or tell the reader to “see the sources” instead of explaining the point.
A 3–6 move outline does not mean a short article. Each move may need multiple subsections or several paragraphs of evidence synthesis, tension, and implications.
If evidence is mixed, present both sides and state your judgment criteria.
Step 4 — QA gates (logic + evidence)
Run both:
references/logic_qa_checklist.md
references/evidence_gates.md
references/objectivity_checks.md
references/mainline_coherence_gate.md
references/final_article_quality_gate.md
If any hard gate fails, return to Step 1 (source sweep) or Step 1b (evidence extraction).
In no-web constrained mode, return to Step 1a and narrow claims as needed.
Step 4b — Iterate until it “locks” (human-like drafting)
Deep research writing is normally iterative. Use references/iteration_protocol.md:
revise thesis/outline if QA reveals gaps
rewrite sections for clarity and scope
add/remove evidence so every claim is supported
trim or rewrite off-mainline sections (anything that does not advance the thesis)
repeat QA + quality scoring until stop criteria are met
Step 4c — Revision log (recommended for real iteration)
Humans keep track of what changed; do the same to avoid thrash:
Add a short “Revision notes” section to article.md, or keep a separate revision_log.md.
Use references/revision_log_template.md.
Step 5 — Stop at the approved article
The normal end state of this skill is an approved article.md plus the supporting research package.
Do not create a separate slide-extraction handoff artifact as part of the default deep-research workflow.
If the user wants slides after the article is approved, hand the article directly to infographic-powerpoint-deck.
Output files (recommended)
article.md
source_dossier.md (required in internet-backed mode)
evidence_extract.md (required in internet-backed mode)
research_notes.md (required)
claim_evidence_ledger.md (required)
revision_log.md (optional, but helpful)
References
Read references/article_skeleton.md when drafting article.md.
Read references/web_research_protocol.md for the required search/deep-reading workflow.
Read references/source_dossier_template.md to structure source collection.
Read references/evidence_extraction_template.md for claim-level extraction.
Read references/source_strategy.md to pick sources and record uncertainty.
Read references/research_notes_template.md to structure research_notes.md.
Read references/claim_evidence_ledger_template.md to prevent unsupported claims.
Read references/logic_qa_checklist.md for the reasoning QA pass.
Read references/evidence_gates.md for objective evidence sufficiency gates.
Read references/objectivity_checks.md for neutrality and confidence calibration checks.
Read references/mainline_coherence_gate.md to catch and remove sections that drift away from the core thesis/user intent.
Read references/final_article_quality_gate.md for final draft quality scoring before handoff.
Read references/longform_depth_standard.md so the final article defaults to paper-grade depth rather than a short summary.
Read references/iteration_protocol.md for iterative improvement and stop criteria.
Read references/revision_log_template.md to track iterations cleanly.
