Skip to main content

research

This skill should be used when the user asks to "research", "fact-check", "check the history", "is this accurate", "research notes", "sources", "historical accuracy", "technical accuracy", "how would this really work", "verify a detail", "interview an expert", "plan a site visit", "expert review", or needs to investigate and record the real-world facts a story relies on and the chapters that use them.

ソース情報

リポジトリ
hashgraph-online/awesome-codex-plugins
ソースの最終更新活動
2026年10月6日 14:41
検出された SKILL.md の言語
英語
スター
1,230
フォーク
343

インストール方法

デフォルトでは、最初にソースを確認する Prompt が選択されています。直接コマンドに切り替えるか、ローカルコピーをダウンロードすることもできます。

ソースファイルを確認

インストールを決める前に、SKILL.md と SkillsMP に表示されている付属ファイルをお読みください。

ファイルエクスプローラー
3 ファイル

SKILL.md を表示中

SKILL.md
ソースの指示 · 読み取り専用プレビュー
name
research
description
This skill should be used when the user asks to "research", "fact-check", "check the history", "is this accurate", "research notes", "sources", "historical accuracy", "technical accuracy", "how would this really work", "verify a detail", "interview an expert", "plan a site visit", "expert review", or needs to investigate and record the real-world facts a story relies on and the chapters that use them.
# Research ## Overview Investigate the real-world facts a story depends on and keep them in `research/` notes: the question, a search plan, the findings with a citation for each, how confident the finding is, and the chapters that rely on them. Research is active work, not only a ledger: form precise questions, go to primary sources where they exist, interview people and visit places, and record what was found in a form a later fact-check can retrace. The CLI tracks each note's status (`open`, `verified`, `disputed`), its `used-in` chapters, and the optional `accuracy`, `confidence`, `method`, `risk`, and `reviewed-by` fields. It checks the chapter links, warns when a final chapter still rests on research that is open or disputed, and warns when a risky note reaches a final chapter without a qualified reviewer. ## Prerequisites A story project with `story.md` in the root. The `research/` folder and its registry are created by the first `story add research`. ## When to Use - A chapter depends on history, science, law, medicine, a trade, a real place, or any detail a knowledgeable reader could check - The user asks whether something is accurate - Before marking a chapter `final` in historical, technical, or contemporary fiction - NOT for invented world facts (use `worldbuilding`) or story-internal continuity (use `revision-continuity`) ## Workflow ### 1. Open a note ```shell story add research "Tidal bore timing" --used-in chapter-03 \ --accuracy must-be-accurate --method fact --confidence low ``` Fill the note's `## Question` with what the story needs to get right, in one or two sentences. Set the fields that describe the note: - `accuracy` - how closely the prose must match reality: `must-be-accurate` (a checkable real fact the plot or setting relies on), `blended` (real facts deliberately mixed with invention), or `invented` (a made-up fact recorded here for consistency). Invented notes need no sources and never trigger the open-research warning. - `method` - where the knowledge comes from: `fact` (desk research), `reading` (a book or paper read for background), `interview`, `site-visit`, or `expert-review`. - `confidence` - `high`, `medium`, or `low`; how sure the current findings are. Start at `low` and raise it as sources agree. - `risk` - a list, when getting it wrong could harm a reader, a real person, or the author: `legal`, `medical`, `weapons`, `safety`, `cultural`, `defamation`, `technical`. Pass `--risk` once per value. ### 2. Plan the investigation 1. Break the question into the specific things the prose asserts or implies ("Could she walk from the station to the docks in 20 minutes in 1953?" rather than "1950s Liverpool"). 2. Write a short `## Search Plan` in the note: the terms to search, the archives, records, or reference works to try, and the people who would know. Mark which would be primary sources (records, first-hand accounts, official data, the place itself) and which secondary. 3. Decide what "enough" looks like: one authoritative primary source, or two independent secondary sources that agree. ### 3. Research 1. Use the research tools available in the session (web search or fetch, documents the user provides). If none are available, give the user the search plan and ask them to supply sources. 2. Record each finding under `## Findings` with its citation beside it: author or institution, title, date, and the page, section, or URL. When a finding rests on exact wording, quote it and give the page or URL, so the claim can be retraced without repeating the search. Add every source to the `sources` frontmatter list, one full citation or URL per entry, with `--source` on `story add` or by editing the file. 3. Set `confidence` from the evidence: `high` for a primary source or independent agreement, `medium` for one good secondary source, `low` for anything recalled, inferred, or from a single weak source. 4. **Never present unverified knowledge as verified.** A fact recalled without a source stays `status: open`. Only set `status: verified` when every finding the chapters rely on has a source. Set `status: disputed` when sources disagree, and record both sides. 5. For interviews and site visits, prepare questions and consent first and record notes in the note body; see `references/interviews-and-site-visits.md`. ### 4. Flag risk; never advise Notes with any `risk` value need a qualified human reviewer (a lawyer, clinician, weapons or safety specialist, cultural reader, or subject engineer, as fits) before the chapters that use them are final. Record the reviewer in `reviewed-by` as a name or role once they have read the passage. `reviewed-by` is a list with no `story add` flag; edit the note's frontmatter by hand: ```yaml reviewed-by: - "Dr A. Patel, A&E consultant" ``` Collect facts and flag concerns, but **never give legal, medical, or safety advice yourself**, and never treat your own research as the review. Portrayals of real, living people carry defamation risk; route those, and sensitivity or authenticity reads, through the `editorial-review` skill. ### 5. Connect it to the story 1. List every chapter that relies on the note in `used-in`. A chapter not written yet is fine (`chapter-09` before it exists), but `story links` still reports a typo of an existing chapter (`chapter-1` beside `chapter-01`) or `chapter-00` as missing. 2. Under `## Story Use`, record how the prose uses the facts and any deliberate departure from them (compressed timelines, invented institutions). A recorded departure is a choice, not an error. 3. Revise the chapters if the findings contradict them, following the `revision-continuity` skill. ### 6. Before finalising Run `story validate .`: it warns about a `final` or `complete` chapter that uses open or disputed research, about verified notes with no sources, and about notes with a `risk` used in a final or complete chapter with no `reviewed-by`. Resolve those before the chapter is marked final, or tell the user which facts remain unverified and which reviews are outstanding. ## Conventions - Note ids are kebab-case topics: `research/tidal-bore-timing.md`. - `sources` entries are kept whole, so citations may contain commas. - `used-in` lists chapter ids; `story rename` and `story remove` keep it current when chapters change. - `accuracy: invented` notes are a consistency record, not research; keep invented world facts that belong to the setting in `worldbuilding`. - Sensitive or lived-experience topics need a human reader as well as sources. Suggest an authenticity or sensitivity read through the `editorial-review` skill, record the reader in `reviewed-by`, and triage their notes through the `feedback-triage` skill. ## CLI Maintenance Use the Story CLI when it is available. If `story` is not installed, use `bun run story --` from the Story Skills repository checkout or the bundled fallback `node ../story-maintenance/scripts/story.js` with the same arguments, resolving the path relative to this skill folder. If no CLI is available, keep `research/_index.md` and the `used-in` lists current by hand. After adding or editing research notes: ```shell story reindex . story links . story validate . ``` ## Reference Files - **`references/research-practice.md`** - What to check, search plans, how to judge sources, citing quotes, confidence, accuracy levels, risk flags, and deliberate departures - **`references/interviews-and-site-visits.md`** - Preparing questions, consent, recording notes, and turning interviews and visits into research notes ## Shared Conventions Every story skill follows the shared conventions in [`../story-maintenance/references/conventions.md`](../story-maintenance/references/conventions.md), resolved relative to this skill folder. Read it before creating, renaming, or linking story files. If that file is missing because this skill was installed without `story-maintenance`, the essentials are: kebab-case ids and filenames, YAML frontmatter on every story-project file, `_index.md` files as the authoritative registries, bidirectional links between entities, `characters` for who is on the page and `mentions` for who is only referred to, `status: deceased` plus `died-in: chapter-{NN}` for deaths, and no project-local generator or build scripts (run only the installed or bundled Story CLI).
GitHubで見る