[Documentation] Use when generating, smart-merging or refactoring the root AI context (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md) and its Claude/Codex projections. Config file only: project-config.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[Workflow] Research web sources and produce a cited, reviewed deliverable. --output={synthesis|business-eval|marketing|course}.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
查看安装方法安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Read the registry → workflows.workflow-research together with this skill. Call /start-workflow workflow-research to resolve the selected mode, pre-actions and fingerprint.
Todo FIRST: before triage, analysis or step execution, create one todo per phase of the selected mode, in order, listing every occurrence of that phase as a line, including conditional/optional ones (a mode that declares no phases gets one todo per occurrence); preserve occurrence IDs, roles and barrier groups. Use native todo tools or an equivalent persistent ledger. Then mark the first todo in_progress; close each step line with its run or skip evidence, and complete a phase todo only when every line is closed and its applicable exit gates hold.
Mode selection and registry loading prepare tracking; any 'first action' below means the first substantive action after this bootstrap.
Call each step skill: read its linked SKILL.md and execute its protocol through the active host with the registry args. Reading or naming a skill alone is not execution. Required gates and core/optional flex follow the linked start-workflow Step Execution Protocol; keep this skill's quality gates, loops and evidence requirements.
Conditions: load each occurrence's registry applicability.when and skipReason verbatim, and record its run/skip evidence through the linked start-workflow protocol. Do not silently omit a todo or turn a conditional skill into an unconditional call; close, in one batch at triage, the todos whose condition is already false there. Declared parallel groups retain their all-return barrier.
Explicit step-skill calls by mode (registry order; roles and conditions remain owned by the registry):
synthesis: /web-research --chain=deep-dive (core) → /knowledge-synthesis (core) → /knowledge-review --fix-loop (gate) → /workflow-end (gate) → /watzup (optional; conditional)
Phase todos: Discover (3; exit review-converged) → Close (2; exit run-closed)business-eval: /web-research --chain=deep-dive (core) → /market-analysis (core) → /business-evaluation (core) → /knowledge-review --fix-loop (gate) → /workflow-end (gate) → /watzup (optional; conditional)
Phase todos: Discover (4; exit review-converged) → Close (2; exit run-closed)marketing: /web-research --chain=deep-dive (core) → /market-analysis (core) → /strategy-builder (core) → /knowledge-review --fix-loop (gate) → /workflow-end (gate) → /watzup (optional; conditional)
Phase todos: Discover (4; exit review-converged) → Close (2; exit run-closed)course: /web-research --chain=deep-dive (core) → /course-builder (core) → /knowledge-review --fix-loop (gate) → /workflow-end (gate) → /watzup (optional; conditional)
Phase todos: Discover (3; exit review-converged) → Close (2; exit run-closed)Regenerate this block with node .claude/scripts/lib/workflow-skill-contract.cjs --write after registry edits; /sync-codex refreshes it before mirroring.
Goal: Research a topic from web sources and deliver ONE cited, reviewed artifact in the form --output selects: a knowledge report (synthesis, default), a business/market viability evaluation (business-eval), a marketing strategy (marketing), or structured course material (course). The workflow produces research artifacts only, never code.
Use it when the answer must come from external sources and end in a durable, cited deliverable. Use a sibling instead for a quick lookup with no artifact (plain /web-research) or for questions about this codebase (/investigate).
IMPORTANT MANDATORY Steps: resolve the workflow-research manifest variant for --output first (default synthesis), then create one task per phase with a row per returned occurrence (default: /web-research --chain=deep-dive -> /knowledge-synthesis -> /knowledge-review --fix-loop -> /workflow-end -> /watzup).
Step contract: steps follow /start-workflow → Step Execution Protocol — gate steps always run, a step that runs invokes its Skill tool, and every other deviation is logged. NEVER batch-complete validation gates.
This skill is the canonical Research & Synthesis entry point. Invoke it with --output=<mode> (default synthesis); /start-workflow workflow-research resolves the same variants through .claude/scripts/lib/workflow-manifest.cjs. Each variant is a complete sequence, so execute the resolved manifest and never a hand-swapped list.
Pick the mode from the prompt BEFORE creating tasks. When the prompt is ambiguous, use synthesis and state the assumption. Every mode shares one research step, /web-research --chain=deep-dive (source map, then evidence base; the /source-deep-dive procedure runs inside it per .claude/skills/web-research/references/research-chain.md), and the /knowledge-review --fix-loop → /workflow-end close, followed by /watzup only when its condition holds; only the terminal synthesis skill(s) differ. The /market-analysis step of business-eval and marketing reads that evidence base first and searches only the gaps it names.
--output | Deliverable | Terminal synthesis skill(s) |
|---|---|---|
| synthesis (default) | Cited knowledge report | /knowledge-synthesis |
| business-eval | Business/market viability evaluation | /market-analysis → /business-evaluation |
| marketing | Marketing strategy | /market-analysis → /strategy-builder |
| course | Learner-ready course | /course-builder |
[BLOCKING] Evidence-artifact identity for business-eval and marketing: before invoking the
first research child, derive one stable ARTIFACT_SLUG from the user's topic and record the exact
MARKET_ANALYSIS_PATH = docs/knowledge/strategy/market-analysis/{ARTIFACT_SLUG}.md in the parent
workflow context/task handoff. Pass those exact values to every child skill. market-analysis is the
only producer; it must write and return that path, and business-evaluation/strategy-builder must
read that exact path rather than deriving a second slug. If a plan directory is active, its
{plan-dir}/research/market-analysis.md file is a copy of the same producer artifact, not a second
identity. This token is not needed for the synthesis variant. — why: sequence ordering
without a shared artifact key still allows a producer/consumer miss that degrades the final evidence
without failing the workflow.
Classify the question and record it in the workflow report. Scope sets research DEPTH inside the research step's caps (≤10 searches, then ≤8 fetches); it never lowers the evidence bar.
| Scope | Signals | Depth |
|---|---|---|
| Narrow | One fact, definition, or comparison of 2–3 named options | 3–5 angle-varied queries; fetch the 2–4 strongest Tier 1–2 sources; a short artifact that still carries every template section the review enforces. |
| Standard | One topic with several angles | Skill defaults: 5–10 queries, 5–8 fetches. |
| Broad or decision-critical | Multi-part topic, contested evidence, or a business/strategy decision rides on it | Split into sub-topics, one bounded research pass per sub-topic (each under the caps), then merge the source maps and evidence bases before synthesis. Run the adversarial checks of /knowledge-review at full depth. |
| Gate | Evidence that proves it |
|---|---|
Review converged (review-converged) | /knowledge-review --fix-loop verdict APPROVED on the final artifact: the gate validated its REVISE/BLOCKED findings, had them fixed at their owner and re-reviewed the fixed artifact in a fresh pass. |
| Citation bar | Every factual claim, number, table row and inference ends with an inline [N] citation mapped to a Sources row (Title, URL, Author/Publisher, Date, Tier). |
| Cross-validated and calibrated | Factual claims rest on 2+ independent sources; a single-source claim is marked unverified and held below 60%; confidence above 80% needs contradicting evidence addressed; Tier 4 is never cited as fact; findings below 60% and open gaps are flagged. |
Artifact identity (business-eval, marketing) | One MARKET_ANALYSIS_PATH, written by market-analysis and read by its consumer. |
| Variant closure | The workflow report records the selected mode, resolver fingerprint and ordered occurrence IDs. |
Run closed (run-closed) | /workflow-end ran last. |
| Skill | Role | When it earns its cost | Proves / feeds |
|---|---|---|---|
/web-research --chain=deep-dive | core | Always; depth per triage. Runs the /source-deep-dive procedure inline; the synthesis skills read its evidence base. | Tiered source map with gaps (tmp/research/_sources-{slug}.md), then the cross-validated evidence base (tmp/research/_evidence-{slug}.md). |
| Terminal synthesis skill(s) | core | Per the Output Modes table. | The deliverable. |
/knowledge-review --fix-loop | gate | Always. It owns validate → fix → fresh re-review. | review-converged: template, citation, confidence, source-quality and anti-bias checks. |
/workflow-end | gate | Always, last. | run-closed, and the short handoff with the artifact path when nothing was built. |
/watzup | optional | The user asked for a session report or an HTML wrap-up, or the session spanned several workflows or prompts that need one consolidated handoff. Skip reason: workflow-end printed the recap, or the short handoff when nothing was built, and every applicable outcome gate passed. | Session report with the artifact path. |
You choose inline vs sub-agent, batching and ordering to minimize wall-clock and tokens at equal quality. Narrow questions run inline. For broad questions, independent sub-topic research passes can run as one parallel wave, because each writes only its own source and evidence files. Merge them before synthesis.
Fixed data dependencies: inside the research step the source map exists before the deep dive; the evidence base exists before synthesis; market-analysis writes MARKET_ANALYSIS_PATH before its consumer reads it; /knowledge-review checks the final artifact; /workflow-end runs last.
tmp/reports/workflow-research-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.md: mode, triage, resolver fingerprint, per-step evidence and deviations, and the paths of the source map, evidence base and final artifact. Append after each step.TaskList and the workflow report before continuing.Retain this run’s source map and evidence base during synthesis, all review rounds, and owner repairs. Cleanup is an orchestrator lifecycle action after /knowledge-review returns APPROVED on the final artifact and /workflow-end successfully accepts closure; record the acceptance evidence and exact removed paths in the workflow report. REVISE, BLOCKED, interruption, or closure failure retains the inputs. Remove only this run’s _sources-{slug}.md and _evidence-{slug}.md if its retention policy permits; never erase another run’s evidence. Cleanup after closure is report housekeeping, not another workflow occurrence.
/knowledge-review --fix-loop owns the loop; each of its review passes is read-only. It validates each REVISE/BLOCKED finding against the evidence, has it fixed at its owner, then re-reviews the fixed artifact in a fresh pass. An evidence gap takes a targeted /source-deep-dive pass over the existing source map, or a /web-research --chain=deep-dive pass on the gap when the map lacks the needed sources. A synthesis defect (missing section, uncited claim, miscalibrated confidence) is fixed in the artifact through its synthesis skill.ask user question tool when a round makes no progress.Protocol guides — Apply each protocol only when its read-when condition holds. If a protocol's text is not in your context, read its file below before you act on it.
incremental-persistence — Persist results per file or section while the work proceeds; a sub-agent or heavy step processes more than three files → .claude/skills/shared/protocols/incremental-persistence.mdsession-goal-ledger — Keep the original goal and every user prompt of the session; running a long or multi-prompt session → .claude/skills/shared/protocols/session-goal-ledger.mdsubagent-return-contract — Sub-agents return a structured envelope and a report path, never an inline report; spawning a sub-agent → .claude/skills/shared/protocols/subagent-return-contract.mdworkflow-registry-binding — Read the workflow registry entry and the workflow skill together, since they must agree; executing or editing a workflow → .claude/skills/shared/protocols/workflow-registry-binding.mdTask Planning Rules: pin Original goal:, keep User prompts this session: P1…Pn, and map the result to every prompt before claiming done; full text: .claude/skills/shared/protocols/session-goal-ledger.md.IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal: one cited, reviewed artifact in the selected --output form, with /knowledge-review converged and every factual claim traceable to a Sources row.
--output mode and triage the question scope FIRST. Scope sets research depth inside the skill caps; it never lowers the citation or cross-validation bar.business-eval and marketing, derive one ARTIFACT_SLUG and MARKET_ANALYSIS_PATH before the first research step and pass the exact values to every child./knowledge-review --fix-loop fixes validated findings at their owner (evidence gap → targeted /source-deep-dive or /web-research --chain=deep-dive pass, synthesis defect → the artifact), then re-reviews the fixed artifact in a fresh pass.--output mode, resolver fingerprint, ordered occurrence IDs, each invoked skill's evidence, and every deviation before /workflow-end; a variant mismatch is a workflow failure.Protocols in force (digest; the guide entries above point to the full text): Nested Task Creation · Incremental Persistence · Sub-Agent Return Contract · Session Goal Ledger · Workflow Registry Binding.
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
[Documentation] Use when generating, smart-merging or refactoring the root AI context (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md) and its Claude/Codex projections. Config file only: project-config.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[Code Quality] Use when a workflow step or the user asks for AI code or plan review: LLM calls, prompts, agents, RAG, evals and guardrails. --mode={code|plan}; --report-only is read-only.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[Architecture] Use when a workflow step or the user asks for architecture design, compliance review, scalability grading or whole-project audit via --mode={design|review|scalability|full}.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[Content] Use when a workflow step or the user asks for product/feature ideation with ranked opportunities and validation tests. --mode={roadmap|scope}.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[Content] Use when a workflow step or the user asks for business viability: Business Model Canvas, financials, risks and go-to-market recommendation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
[Code Quality] Use when a workflow step or the user asks for a focused code-change review: staged, unstaged, branch diff or simple pull request. --fix-loop fixes and re-reviews. Complex pull request: workflow-review-changes; rationale: why-review.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。