| name | us-program-research |
| description | This skill should be used when the user needs structured research and ranking of US academic programs (PhD, Master |
| license | MIT |
US Academic Program Research — Complete Workflow
Purpose
Run structured research on US academic programs with credential analysis, parallel discovery, adaptive scorecards, and generation of an actionable application plan in a deliverable format.
When to Use
Use this skill when the task requires:
- Selecting and ranking programs (PhD, Master's, or Bachelor's) in the US
- Detailed comparison of curriculum, costs, and admission requirements
- Application strategy based on profile, budget, and timeline
- A final consolidated document for decision-making and execution
Progress Tracking
Display progress before each research phase:
[███░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░] 15% — Phase 0: Program Type Detection & Input Collection
[██████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░] 30% — Phase 1: Profile & Credential Analysis
[█████████░░░░░░░░░░░] 45% — Phase 2: Parallel Discovery (4 subagents)
[████████████░░░░░░░░] 60% — Phase 3: Parallel Deep Research (4 subagents)
[███████████████░░░░░] 75% — Phase 4: Adaptive Scorecards & Ranking
[█████████████████░░░] 85% — Phase 5: Document Generation
[████████████████████] 100% — Phase 6: Inline Report & Recommendations
Workflow
Follow the phases defined below in sequence, maintaining source traceability and separating facts from inferences.
Personalized research on US academic programs (PhD, Master's MS/MBA/MPS, or Bachelor's).
Analyzes the candidate's profile, runs parallel searches via subagents, identifies hidden gems,
applies an adaptive scorecard, and generates a complete ACTION_PLAN.md with rankings, curricula, costs,
and a step-by-step checklist.
Output language: Portuguese (matches user research context). Queries/subagents: English (required for search quality).
Execution Instructions
- PHASE 0 — detect program type (FIRST QUESTION)
- PHASE 0B — collect all inputs before researching
- PHASE 2 — launch 4 subagents in ONE message (true parallelism)
- PHASE 3 — launch 4 deep-research subagents in ONE message
- PHASE 4 — apply adaptive scorecard after all research is complete
- PHASE 5 — generate full document and save
- PHASE 6 — present inline report to user
CRITICAL: All search queries and subagent prompts MUST be in English.
PHASE 0 — Program Type Detection
Use AskUserQuestion with:
"What type of US academic program are you looking for?"
Options:
- PhD / Doctorate — 4–7 years of research. Usually fully-funded (stipend + tuition).
- Master's — MS, MBA, MPS, MEng (1.5–3 years). Executive, technical, online or in-person.
- Bachelor's / Undergraduate — First or second degree (BS, BA). 2–4 years.
The entire workflow adapts to this answer.
PHASE 0B — Input Collection (2 rounds of AskUserQuestion)
Round A — Personal profile (all types, max 4 questions):
- Full name + email
- Country of origin + language(s) of diplomas
- Highest current degree: institution, diploma type, GPA/grade (e.g., "8.1/10")
- Desired field of study (e.g., Computer Science, Business Analytics, AI, Finance...)
Round B — Logistics and preferences (max 4 questions):
- Target city/state in the US (or "open to any location")
- Preferred format: in-person / 100% online / hybrid / no preference
- Total budget: under $20k / $20–50k / $50–80k / over $80k / seeking funding
- Desired start date: 2026 / 2027 / 2028 / flexible
Additional type-specific question:
- PhD: Specific research area? Known advisors? Funded programs only?
- Master's: Current role/level (Junior/Manager/Director/VP/C-Level)? Will you work during the program?
- Bachelor's: First or second degree? Transferable credits? Large/small campus preference?
Optional inputs (offer, do not require): CV, academic transcripts, prior executive courses,
US immigration status (Green Card / F1-OPT / H1-B / other).
PHASE 1 — Profile & Credential Analysis
Determine foreign degree equivalency and evaluation strategy BEFORE scoring any program.
Action: Consult references/credential-analysis.md for:
- Degree equivalency table by country (includes risk for Brazilian Tecnólogo degree)
- WES vs ECE comparison by program type
- WES ICAP step-by-step logistics (8 steps + 2 scenarios: favorable vs unfavorable result)
- Anti-downgrading analysis for VP/C-Level candidates (Master's only)
- Advisor fit analysis for PhD + contact email template
- In-state tuition logic (Green Card + 12-month domicile = eligible)
Brazilian Tecnólogo = HIGH RISK. WES may evaluate as Associate's instead of Bachelor's.
Recommend institutional letter + ECE as second opinion if WES result is unfavorable.
PHASE 2 — Parallel Discovery (4 Subagents)
CRITICAL: Launch all 4 subagents in ONE SINGLE message (Task tool × 4 simultaneous).
Divide research among 4 subagents with subagent_type="general-purpose":
| Subagent | Focus | Minimum Programs |
|---|
| A | Regional / Local In-Person | 4 |
| B | National Online / Brand Equity | 5 |
| C | Hidden Gems (low cost) | 3 |
| D | Reference Rankings | Top 20 context |
Action: Consult references/subagent-prompts.md for the full prompts (in English)
for each subagent, including all fields to collect and search queries.
After all 4 subagents complete:
- Deduplicate programs (same school may appear in multiple subagents)
- Verify accreditation: AACSB (business), ABET (engineering) — absence penalizes Brand Equity
- For PhD: verify if fully-funded vs self-funded
- Classify into groups: 1 (primary in-person), 1.5 (online brand equity), 2 (technical/deprioritized)
- Target: 12–20 unique programs for Phase 3
PHASE 3 — Parallel Deep Research (4 Subagents)
CRITICAL: Split the 12–20 programs into 4 groups (3–5 each) and launch in ONE single message.
For each program, collect: full curriculum, verified cost on official website, student reviews
(Niche/Reddit/GMAT Club/GradCafe), admission requirements (GMAT/TOEFL/letters/deadline), alumni network.
Action: Consult references/subagent-prompts.md for the full deep research template
(section "Deep Research Template") with all queries in English.
PHASE 4 — Adaptive Scorecards
Action: Consult references/scorecards.md for the complete scorecards.
Scorecard Selection by Program Type:
| Type | Scorecard | Key Criteria |
|---|
| Master's | Scorecard A | Brand + Exec Readiness + Flexibility + Network + ROI + Satisfaction |
| PhD | Scorecard B | Research Reputation + Advisor Fit + Funding + Placement + Satisfaction |
| Bachelor's | Scorecard C | Brand + Career Launch + ROI + Campus Life + Satisfaction |
Master's — Adaptive Weights by Candidate Level:
| Criterion | EXECUTIVE | SENIOR | STANDARD | CAREER_LAUNCH | OPT_CRITICAL |
|---|
| Brand Equity | 25 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 22 |
| Executive Readiness* | 25 | 22 | 18 | 10 | 20 |
| Flexibility | 16 | 16 | 14 | 12 | 16 |
| Network Quality | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 12 |
| ROI / Cost-Benefit | 12 | 14 | 16 | 20 | 14 |
| Student Satisfaction | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| STEM Designation | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
*For VP/C-Level = "Executive Readiness". For non-executives = "Career Launch Potential".
Tier Classification:
| Tier | Score | Label | Action |
|---|
| Top 5 | ≥ 80 | Highest Priority | MUST APPLY |
| Tier 2 | 70–79 | If Budget Allows | IF BUDGET ALLOWS |
| Tier 3 | 55–69 | Backup | BACKUP ONLY |
| Tier 4 | < 55 | Avoid | AVOID |
💎 Hidden Gem = Score ≥ 70 AND Cost ≤ 50% of budget AND Satisfaction ≥ 8.0/10
PHASE 5 — Document Generation
Save as: {CANDIDATE_NAME}_US_PROGRAM_ACTION_PLAN.md (in current directory).
Action: Consult references/action-plan-template.md for the full document template
in Portuguese, including all sections, ~30 aligned tables, and the Table Formatting Policy.
Required sections in the generated document:
General Status → Priority Next Actions → Phase 1 (WES/ECE) → Phase 2 (Tests) →
Phase 3 (Contact) → Phase 4 (Submission) → Evaluators → Selected Programs by Tier →
Adaptive Scorecard + Full Ranking → Curriculum Comparison → Detailed Curricula →
Cost Comparison → Admission Comparison → Why Each Program → Document Inventory → Notes.
PHASE 6 — Inline Report
Present to the user in chat (in Portuguese) after saving the file:
Block 1 — Candidate Profile (max 5 lines): type, field, role/education, estimated GPA, immigration status.
Block 2 — Top 5 Recommendations (compact table):
| Rank | Program | Score | Cost | Highlight |
Block 3 — 💎 Hidden Gems (if identified): score ≥ 70 + low cost + satisfaction ≥ 8.0.
Block 4 — ⚠️ Alerts: programs without reviews (red flag), daytime-only for executives,
advisors without recent publications (PhD), borderline degree → WES urgent.
Block 5 — URGENT Next Action: "What to do TODAY" — usually: start WES/ECE or contact advisor.
Block 6 — Generated File: ✅ Document saved: {NAME}_US_PROGRAM_ACTION_PLAN.md ({N} lines, {N} tables)
Additional Resources
Reference Files
Consult as needed during execution:
references/credential-analysis.md — Degree equivalencies, full WES/ECE logistics,
anti-downgrading, advisor fit (PhD), in-state tuition logicreferences/scorecards.md — Complete Scorecards A/B/C with detailed rubrics, ROI formula
with numeric example, tier thresholds, and hidden gem definitionreferences/subagent-prompts.md — Complete prompts (in English) for the 8 subagents:
4 discovery (Phases 2A/B/C/D) and deep research template (Phase 3)references/action-plan-template.md — Complete ACTION_PLAN.md template in Portuguese
with all sections and aligned tablesreferences/research-sources.md — Mandatory research sources and universal red flags
by program type
Critical Rules
- All research queries and subagent prompts must be in English.
- Do not skip credential analysis before scoring/ranking.
- Do not present a final recommendation without citing sources and criteria.
- Clearly differentiate confirmed data, assumptions, and recommendations.
Error Handling
| Error | Likely Cause | Action |
|---|
| Program URL unavailable (404) | University program page moved or removed | Note inaccessibility; use cached data or alternative sources for that program |
| No funding data found | Program doesn't publish funding info publicly | Mark as "funding data unavailable"; recommend user contact program directly |
| Insufficient programs match criteria | Filters too restrictive (budget, location, ranking) | Relax constraints and explain tradeoffs to user |
| Budget eliminates all options | Target budget below typical program tuition | Inform user of realistic cost ranges; suggest funded programs or assistantships |
| Credential gap detected | User credentials unlikely to meet minimum requirements | Flag disqualifiers; recommend strengthening credentials before applying |
| WebFetch blocked by university site | Bot-blocking or requires login | Use alternate sources (US News, Grad Cafe, QS rankings) for that program's data |
Example Usage
- "Rank MS in Data Science programs in the US with a budget of USD 50k."
- "Compare funded PhD options in Computer Science focused on distributed systems."
- "Build an application plan for an MBA starting in 2027."
