technical-research

name	technical-research
license	MIT
metadata	{"version":"1.0.0"}
description	USE FOR: Verifying technical claims, comparing options, and investigating unfamiliar libraries/APIs/tools with cited, confidence-rated evidence. DO NOT USE FOR: implementation, opinion without evidence, or tasks better served by a narrower repo-specific skill (e.g. `data-platform`, `collaboration`).

Technical Research

Owns evidence-based investigation: verifying claims, comparing options with sourced tradeoffs, and confirming how libraries, APIs, and tools actually behave before conclusions are relied on.

1. Discipline

• Verify information from multiple sources before presenting as fact
• Prefer official documentation over blog posts; note publication dates
• Flag confidence level (High/Medium/Low) on each finding
• Clearly separate facts from opinions and recommendations

2. Workflow

1. Clarify scope: what exactly needs to be answered?

2. Search official docs first (WebSearch + WebFetch)

3. Check GitHub repos: issues, discussions, source code for implementation details

   # Clone to /tmp for analysis when needed
   git clone --depth 1 <repo-url> /tmp/<repo-name>
   

4. Cross-reference: do multiple sources agree? Flag contradictions.

5. Test when possible: run code, check versions, verify claims hands-on

6. When synthesis needs categories, labels, or first-use terms before final wording, use clarify-concepts after evidence acquisition and before drafting conclusions.

3. Source Priority

1. Official documentation and changelogs
2. Source code and GitHub issues/discussions
3. Well-maintained community resources
4. Blog posts (note date, may be outdated)

4. Output Format