trip-research

name	TRIP-research
description	Exploratory research or spike - investigation without production code
disable-model-invocation	true
argument-hint	what do you want to investigate?

Research Mode

You are now in research mode - for exploratory investigations that don't directly produce production code.

Use this for:

• Technology evaluation
• Feasibility studies
• Architecture exploration
• Performance investigation
• Bug root cause analysis
• Proof of concept

Your Task

Research: $ARGUMENTS

---

Step 0: Read fully @docs/ARCHI.md

Step 1: Define Scope

1.1 Clarify the Question

"What specific question(s) are we trying to answer?"

Document the research question(s) clearly:

• What do we need to find out?
• What would a successful outcome look like?
• What decisions will this research inform?

1.2 Compute Box

"How much thinking effort does this research require?"

Based on the complexity of the question(s), suggest an appropriate thinking level:

Level	When to Use	Research Type
quick	Simple lookup, straightforward answer	"What's the syntax for X?"
brief	Minor analysis, single-source research	"How does library X handle Y?"
think	Standard research, comparing options	"Which library should we use for X?"
think hard	Complex analysis, architectural decisions	"How should we restructure module X?"
think harder	Deep investigation, multiple tradeoffs	"What's the best approach for X given constraints A, B, C?"
ultrathink	Critical decisions, extensive exploration	"Should we rewrite system X? What are all implications?"

Use the AskUserQuestion tool to confirm the thinking level:

• Question: "Based on this research scope, I suggest using [level] thinking. Does that seem appropriate?"
• Options: "Yes, use [level]" (proceed with suggested level), "Use a different level" (I want to adjust the thinking effort)

Once confirmed, the agent should apply the corresponding thinking effort throughout the investigation.

---

Step 2: Research Plan

Create a lightweight research plan (not a full TRIP plan):

# Research: [Topic]

## Question(s)

- [Primary question]
- [Secondary questions if any]

## Approach

1. [First thing to investigate]
2. [Second thing to investigate]
3. [...]

## Success Criteria

- [ ] [What we need to determine]
- [ ] [What we need to determine]

## Compute Level

[quick / brief / think / think hard / think harder / ultrathink]

---

Step 3: Confirm & Start

Present the research plan summary to the user, then use the AskUserQuestion tool with two questions:

Question 1 (header: "Start"):

• Question: "Research plan ready — Question: [primary question], Approach: [brief summary], Compute: [level]. Ready to start?"
• Options: "Yes, start research" (proceed with investigation), "Adjust the plan" (I have changes to the research scope or approach)

Question 2 (header: "Output"):

• Question: "How do you want the findings delivered?"
• Options: "Chat only" (respond directly in the conversation), "Write a memo" (create a file in docs/6-memo/)

If "Adjust": Modify the plan based on user feedback, then re-present using AskUserQuestion.

If "Yes": Proceed with investigation. Remember the output preference for Step 5.

---

Step 4: Investigation

Conduct the research:

For Technology Evaluation

• Review documentation
• Check community/ecosystem health
• Look at alternatives
• Consider maintenance burden
• Assess learning curve

For Feasibility Study

• Identify constraints
• Prototype critical parts (throwaway code OK)
• Identify risks and unknowns
• Estimate effort

For Performance Investigation

• Establish baseline metrics
• Identify bottlenecks
• Test hypotheses
• Measure improvements

For Bug Investigation

• Reproduce the issue
• Trace the root cause
• Identify contributing factors
• Consider similar vulnerabilities

---

Step 4b: Codex Cross-Check

For decision-grade findings — architecture recommendations, technology choices, anything the user will build on (typically compute level think hard and above) — red-team the draft conclusion with the codex-ask skill before presenting. Skip for quick lookups.

export STATE_DIR=".claude/skills/codex-ask/state"
bash .claude/skills/codex-plan-review/scripts/start.sh \
    --prompt-file .claude/skills/codex-ask/prompts/ask.tpl \
    <topic-label> "Here is my draft recommendation: <summary + key rationale>. Red-team it: what am I missing, what would you choose instead, and why?"

Follow up in the same thread (resume.sh + followup.tpl) if the answer raises points worth probing. Then:

• Incorporate legitimate points into the findings (adjust the recommendation or add caveats).
• Record real disagreements in the memo's Open Questions section with both positions — the user decides.
• This is advisory, not gating: you own the final recommendation.

---

Step 5: Present Findings

If "Chat only" was selected

Present the findings directly in the conversation, structured as:

1. Summary (2-3 sentences)
2. Key Findings (numbered list)
3. Recommendations (what to do, rationale, alternatives)
4. Open Questions (if any)

Then use the AskUserQuestion tool:

• Question: "Research complete. What would you like to do next?"
• Options: "Elaborate on findings" (dive deeper into specific results), "Save as memo" (write findings to docs/6-memo/ after all), "Plan implementation" (create a TRIP plan based on these results), "Done" (no further action needed)

If "Save as memo": write the memo using the template below, then confirm the file location.

If "Write a memo" was selected

Create findings document in docs/6-memo/:

File: docs/6-memo/research_[date]_[topic].md

# Research: [Topic]

**Date**: DD-MM-YYYY
**Author**: [Name]

## Summary

[2-3 sentence executive summary]

## Questions Investigated

### Q1: [Question]

**Finding**: [Answer]
**Confidence**: [High/Medium/Low]
**Evidence**: [What supports this conclusion]

### Q2: [Question]

[...]

## Key Findings

1. **[Finding 1]**: [Details]
2. **[Finding 2]**: [Details]
3. **[Finding 3]**: [Details]

## Recommendations

- **Recommended**: [What we should do]
- **Rationale**: [Why]
- **Alternatives Considered**: [What else was evaluated]

## Open Questions

- [Questions that remain unanswered]
- [Areas needing further investigation]

## Next Steps

- [ ] [Action item 1]
- [ ] [Action item 2]

## Appendix (optional)

### Code Snippets / Prototypes

[Any throwaway code created during research]

### References

- [Links to documentation, articles, etc.]

Then use the AskUserQuestion tool:

• Question: "Research documented at docs/6-memo/research_[date]_[topic].md. What would you like to do next?"
• Options: "Elaborate on findings" (dive deeper into specific results), "Plan implementation" (create a TRIP plan based on these results), "Done" (no further action needed)

---

What This Workflow Produces

• Clear recommendations
• Basis for future TRIP planning
• Optionally: documented findings in docs/6-memo/

What This Workflow Does NOT Produce

• No production code
• No version bump
• No changelog entry
• No commits to main

---

Transition to Implementation

If research concludes that implementation should proceed, use the AskUserQuestion tool:

• Question: "Based on this research, would you like me to create a TRIP plan for implementation?"
• Options: "Yes, create a plan" (use findings to inform TRIP-1-plan), "Not yet" (I'll decide later)

If yes, use findings to inform TRIP-1-plan.