research

name	research
description	Technical research and specification verification skill using Context7 MCP. Used for checking the latest library/framework documentation, verifying API specifications, confirming version differences, and gathering evidence for implementation decisions. Especially useful for investigating "latest", "recommended", "breaking changes", and "migration steps".

Trigger Conditions

• When receiving a research request such as "I want to check the latest specification" or "I want to confirm the official recommendation"
• When compatibility verification is needed before introducing or upgrading a library or framework
• When implementation decisions need to be backed by primary sources

Research Flow

1. Clarify the target library name, target version, and implementation purpose
2. Resolve the library ID using mcp__context7__resolve-library-id
3. Investigate per use case using mcp__context7__query-docs
4. Verify important findings against English primary sources (official docs / official blog / release notes / RFC)
5. Organize the response in order of: Conclusion -> Evidence -> Impact Scope -> Unresolved Items

Important Rules

• The primary source for technical research is Context7 MCP
• Prefer English versions of technical documentation
• Treat Japanese articles as supplementary information; assertions must be limited to content verified against primary sources
• For requests about "latest" or "as of today", always note the reference date, last updated date, and target version
• For breaking changes, deprecations, and security fixes, verify up to release notes/changelog
• Do not mix speculation with facts. Clearly label speculation

When Context7 Is Unavailable

• Prioritize official documentation, official GitHub, and official release notes
• Annotate information obtained through alternative research with "Context7 not used"
• Separate weakly-evidenced information as an additional verification task before finalizing implementation

Output Format

• Conclusion: Key points for the quickest decision-making
• Evidence: Reference links (English preferred) and key points
• Impact Scope: Affected layers, files, and configurations
• Unresolved Items: Items requiring further confirmation

Research Quality Check

• Did you specify the library name, version, and runtime environment (Node/Browser/Edge, etc.)?
• Are references primarily from primary sources?
• Are dates and versions consistent?
• Are speculation and facts separated?
• Did you present actionable next steps directly linked to implementation?