| name | researchstack-next-step |
| description | Next-step triage skill for long-running research projects. Use when the user is mid-paper, mid-experiment,
mid-writing, or generally stuck and needs a clear recommendation for which researchstack skill to use next,
what not to do yet, and why.
|
Next Step
Read ../researchstack/references/workflow.md and ../researchstack/references/memory.md.
If the project is ongoing, inspect relevant project memory first via the researchstack-learn workflow. Pull in only high-signal context:
- current thesis,
- venue and deadline,
- known reviewer risks,
- experiment status,
- artifact or reproducibility constraints,
- writing or framing preferences,
- rejected directions.
This skill is a decision layer, not an execution skill.
The job is to answer:
Given the current research state, what should the user do next?
Required output:
- Current stage.
- Blocking mismatch.
- Recommended next skill, usually exactly one and at most two.
- Why this step beats the alternatives.
- What not to do yet.
- A short follow-up chain after the recommended step.
Use assets/next-step-decision-template.md.
Stage labels:
- idea formation,
- literature positioning,
- evidence building,
- experiment operations,
- artifact hardening,
- writing,
- layout and figure polish,
- submission triage,
- review and rebuttal.
Common blocking mismatches:
- thesis exists but novelty is untested,
- thesis exists but related-work boundary is unclear,
- claims are broader than current evidence,
- results exist but artifact provenance is weak,
- figures exist but claim-to-evidence mapping is unclear,
- writing started before experiment design is locked,
- deadline pressure means scope should shrink rather than expand,
- reviewer risk is known but not answered by an experiment.
Decision rules:
- If the thesis is vague, recommend
researchstack-lab-intake or researchstack-idea-refine.
- If the user only has an area, recommend
researchstack-idea-finder.
- If novelty is untested, recommend
researchstack-idea-review.
- If the closest competitors are unclear, recommend
researchstack-literature-map.
- If claims and evaluation are not aligned, recommend
researchstack-experiment-design.
- If experiments are chaotic or results are hard to promote, recommend
researchstack-experiment-ops.
- If numbers or figures cannot be traced, recommend
researchstack-artifact-audit.
- If implementation could invalidate conclusions, recommend
researchstack-code-review.
- If evidence is stable and the thesis is locked, recommend
researchstack-paper-write.
- If writing exists but figures/tables/captions are weak, recommend
researchstack-figure-studio or researchstack-paper-layout.
- If the user is near a deadline, recommend
researchstack-submission-gate.
- If a draft is complete enough to attack, recommend
researchstack-peer-review.
- If reviews exist, recommend
researchstack-rebuttal-coach.
Be decisive. Do not list the whole skill catalog.
If there is not enough information to decide, ask for only the missing state needed to choose the next skill:
- current thesis,
- strongest current evidence,
- closest baseline or related paper,
- venue or deadline,
- what artifact/code/result exists now.
When a durable decision emerges, suggest recording it with researchstack-learn.
