skills/deep-research/SKILL.md
Conduct comprehensive multi-source research for complex questions. Use when the user asks a complicated question requiring multiple sources, in-depth analysis, cross-referencing, or expert-level research reports. Triggers on "research", "investigate", "deep dive", "analyze thoroughly", "comprehensive report", or questions involving conflicting sources.
npx skillsauth add lvndry/jazz deep-researchInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Autonomous research agent for complex, multi-source questions requiring synthesis, verification, and expert-level analysis.
Respect the user's time frame when given. If none is given, use the most recent information on the topic.
Execute these phases sequentially. Each phase builds on the previous.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1. DECOMPOSE → 2. PLAN → 3. SEARCH → 4. VERIFY → 5. SYNTHESIZE │
│ ↑ │ │
│ └────────── ITERATE IF GAPS ─────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Break the complex question into atomic sub-questions.
Identify question type:
Extract entities and relationships:
Generate sub-questions (aim for 3-7):
Original: "How will AI impact healthcare costs in the next decade?"
Sub-questions:
1. What are current AI applications in healthcare?
2. What cost savings have been documented from existing AI healthcare tools?
3. What are projected AI adoption rates in healthcare?
4. What are the main cost drivers in healthcare that AI could affect?
5. What barriers exist to AI adoption in healthcare?
6. What do expert forecasts predict for AI healthcare costs?
Identify dependencies:
For each sub-question, generate 2-3 search query variants:
| Technique | Example | | ---------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Synonym expansion | "renewable energy" → "solar wind power", "clean energy generation" | | Specificity ladder | Broad: "diet benefits" → Specific: "Mediterranean diet cardiovascular 2023" | | Source targeting | Add: "research paper", "meta-analysis", "government report" | | Recency filter | Add year constraints for time-sensitive topics |
Create a structured research plan before searching.
## Research Plan: [Original Question]
### Objective
[One sentence goal]
### Sub-Questions (Priority Order)
1. [Critical] Question that unlocks others
2. [High] Core factual questions
3. [Medium] Supporting context
4. [Low] Nice-to-have details
### Search Strategy
- Parallel batch 1: [Q1, Q2] (independent)
- Sequential: Q3 depends on Q1 results
- Parallel batch 2: [Q4, Q5]
### Source Requirements
- [ ] Academic sources (peer-reviewed)
- [ ] Official reports (government, organizations)
- [ ] Expert commentary (reputable analysts)
- [ ] Recent news (within 12 months)
- [ ] **Time frame**: User-specified (e.g. 2024, last 5 years) or default to most recent
### Confidence Target
[High/Medium] - Define what "good enough" means
Execute searches efficiently using parallel batches.
For each search result:
## Source Log
### [Source 1: Title]
- URL: [link]
- Type: [Academic/News/Official/Expert/Blog]
- Date: [publication date]
- Credibility: [High/Medium/Low]
- Key claims:
- Claim 1: "[quote or paraphrase]"
- Claim 2: "[quote or paraphrase]"
- Contradicts: [other source if applicable]
Critical phase - Do not skip. Verify before synthesizing.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ For each major claim: │
│ 1. Is it supported by 2+ sources? │
│ 2. Do sources have different biases? │
│ 3. Is the claim recent enough? │
│ 4. Are there credible contradictions? │
└─────────────────────────────────────────┘
After initial search round, explicitly answer:
| Condition | Action | | ------------------------- | -------------------------------- | | Sub-question unanswered | Search with reformulated queries | | Claim has single source | Search for corroboration | | Major contradiction found | Search for resolution/context | | Confidence target met | Proceed to synthesis | | Search budget exhausted | Note limitations, proceed |
For high-stakes claims:
## Verification Chain: [Claim]
Level 1: Original source says X
Level 2: Source cites study Y → Verify study Y exists and says X
Level 3: Study methodology → Is it rigorous?
Verification status: [Confirmed/Partially Confirmed/Unverified/Contradicted]
Combine findings into a coherent, well-cited report.
Always end the report with a visible "Sources" or "References" section listing every source used. Readers must be able to see and verify where information came from.
# [Research Question]
## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentence answer with confidence level]
## Key Findings
### Finding 1: [Statement]
[Evidence synthesis with citations]
- Source A reports... [1]
- This is corroborated by... [2]
- However, Source C notes... [3]
### Finding 2: [Statement]
[Evidence synthesis with citations]
## Analysis
[Your interpretation connecting the findings]
## Limitations & Gaps
- [What couldn't be verified]
- [Areas needing more research]
- [Potential biases in available sources]
## Confidence Assessment
| Claim | Confidence | Basis |
| ------- | ---------- | ------------------------ |
| Claim 1 | High | 3+ independent sources |
| Claim 2 | Medium | 2 sources, some conflict |
| Claim 3 | Low | Single source, recent |
## Sources
[Required — list every source used so readers can verify and follow up.]
[1] Author or Publisher, "Title", Publication/Site, Date. URL
[2] Author or Publisher, "Title", Publication/Site, Date. URL
[3] ...
Use this internal reasoning structure:
**Thinking through [question]...**
1. Decomposition: I need to understand [X] before I can answer [Y]
2. Current knowledge: I found that [claims] from [sources]
3. Gaps identified: I still don't know [Z]
4. Contradictions: Source A says X, but Source B says Y
5. Resolution strategy: I'll search for [specific query] to resolve
6. Confidence update: After verification, I'm [%] confident because [reason]
Before delivering final report:
Track research progress in a structured file to maintain context across sessions and enable deeper analysis.
# research-memory-[timestamp].yaml
research:
id: "deep-research-2024-01-15-143022"
question: "How will AI impact healthcare costs in the next decade?"
started_at: "2024-01-15T14:30:22Z"
status: "in_progress" # planning|researching|synthesizing|completed
user_constraints:
depth: "comprehensive"
time_frame: "next decade"
expected_output: "detailed report with sources"
special_requirements: ["PDF analysis", "academic papers"]
phases:
planning:
completed: true
timestamp: "2024-01-15T14:30:45Z"
user_responses:
research_approach: "multi-source with academic focus"
key_areas: ["cost savings", "adoption barriers", "expert predictions"]
depth_preference: "in-depth with primary sources"
decomposition:
completed: true
sub_questions:
- id: "current_ai_healthcare"
question: "What are current AI applications in healthcare?"
status: "completed"
priority: "high"
- id: "cost_savings_evidence"
question: "What cost savings have been documented?"
status: "in_progress"
priority: "high"
research:
current_batch: 2
batches:
batch_1:
status: "completed"
queries: ["AI healthcare applications 2024", "machine learning medical diagnosis"]
sources_found: 12
batch_2:
status: "in_progress"
queries: ["AI healthcare cost savings studies", "ROI AI medical tools"]
sources_found: 8
findings:
key_claims:
- id: "ai_diagnostic_accuracy"
claim: "AI improves diagnostic accuracy by 10-30%"
confidence: "high"
sources: ["source_1", "source_2", "source_3"]
verification_status: "triangulated"
last_updated: "2024-01-15T15:15:30Z"
contradictions:
- id: "cost_savings_timeline"
claim_a: "Immediate cost savings possible"
claim_b: "Cost savings take 2-3 years"
resolution_strategy: "investigate further"
sources: ["academic_paper_2023", "industry_report_2024"]
gaps:
- question: "Long-term cost implications beyond 5 years"
reason: "Limited longitudinal studies"
mitigation: "Search for expert predictions and models"
sources:
source_1:
title: "AI in Medical Imaging: A Systematic Review"
type: "academic"
url: "https://example.com/paper1.pdf"
date: "2024-01-10"
credibility_score: 14
key_claims: ["claim_1", "claim_2"]
checkpoints:
- id: "mid_research_review"
timestamp: "2024-01-15T15:45:00Z"
findings_so_far: "Found 15 sources, 3 major themes emerging"
user_feedback: "Direction looks good, focus more on economic analysis"
adjustments_made: ["Added economic queries", "Prioritized ROI studies"]
synthesis:
status: "pending"
outline:
executive_summary: "AI will reduce healthcare costs by 5-15% within 5 years"
key_findings:
- "Diagnostic improvements"
- "Administrative efficiency"
limitations:
- "Implementation challenges"
- "Regulatory hurdles"
START: User Question
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ INITIALIZE │ ← Create research memory file
│ MEMORY │
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ PLANNING │ ← Ask user clarifying questions
│ QUESTIONS │ about depth, format, focus areas
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ DECOMPOSITION │ ← Break question into sub-questions
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ BATCHED │ --> │ PDF/DOC │
│ SEARCH │ │ ANALYSIS │
└─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘
↓ ↓
┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐
│ FINDINGS │ <-- │ EXTRACTED │
│ EXTRACTION │ │ CLAIMS & │
└─────────────────┘ │ INSIGHTS │
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ CHECKPOINT │ ← Pause for user feedback
│ & FEEDBACK │ "Is this going right direction?"
└─────────────────┘
↓
├─ Continue ──→ [Adjust search strategy]
│
├─ Pivot ─────→ [Add/remove focus areas]
│
└─ Deepen ────→ [More detailed analysis]
┌─────────────────┐
│ VERIFICATION │ ← Cross-reference claims, check contradictions
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ SYNTHESIS │ ← Build comprehensive report
│ & REPORT │
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ FINAL │ ← Present to user
│ DELIVERY │
└─────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ MEMORY │ ← Archive for future reference
│ ARCHIVAL │
└─────────────────┘
Before starting research, ask the user clarifying questions:
## Research Planning Questions
**1. Research Depth & Scope**
What level of depth are you looking for?
- [ ] Overview/summary (quick answers)
- [ ] Detailed analysis (comprehensive coverage)
- [ ] Expert-level (academic papers, technical details)
**2. Expected Output Format**
What format would be most useful?
- [ ] Executive summary with key findings
- [ ] Detailed report with evidence and citations
- [ ] Comparative analysis
- [ ] Prediction/forecast based on current trends
**3. Key Focus Areas**
Which aspects are most important to you? (Select all that apply)
- [ ] Current state/trends
- [ ] Future predictions
- [ ] Specific technologies/regions
- [ ] Cost/benefit analysis
- [ ] Implementation challenges
**4. Source Preferences**
Any preferred source types?
- [ ] Academic/research papers
- [ ] Industry reports
- [ ] News/media coverage
- [ ] Government data
- [ ] Expert opinions
**5. Time Sensitivity**
How important is recency?
- [ ] Very important (focus on latest data)
- [ ] Somewhat important (balance with quality)
- [ ] Not important (prioritize comprehensive historical view)
Stop research periodically to validate direction:
## Research Checkpoint - Batch [N] Complete
**Findings so far:**
- [Key finding 1]
- [Key finding 2]
- [Emerging pattern/trend]
**Direction Check:**
Are we exploring the right areas? Should we:
- [ ] Continue current direction
- [ ] Pivot to different focus areas
- [ ] Add specific topics to investigate
- [ ] Reduce scope on certain areas
**Depth Adjustment:**
Current depth level seems [appropriate/too shallow/too deep]. Should we:
- [ ] Maintain current depth
- [ ] Go deeper on [specific topic]
- [ ] Summarize [specific topic] more briefly
**New Questions Emerged:**
- [Question that arose during research]
- [Additional clarification needed]
For comprehensive research, automatically download and analyze:
PDF Source → Download → Text Extraction → Content Analysis → Key Insights → Memory Storage
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
URL/Title Local File Structured Text Claims/Facts Summaries Research Memory
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ 1. QUESTION → 2. MEMORY INIT → 3. PLANNING QUESTIONS → 4. USER INPUT │
│ │
│ 5. DECOMPOSITION → 6. MEMORY UPDATE → 7. BATCHED SEARCH → 8. PDF ANALYSIS │
│ │
│ 9. VERIFICATION → 10. CHECKPOINT → 11. USER FEEDBACK → 12. ADJUSTMENTS │
│ │
│ 13. ITERATION OR → 14. SYNTHESIS → 15. FINAL REPORT → 16. MEMORY ARCHIVE │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
tools
Create and track task lists for complex multi-step work. Use when planning projects, breaking down work, tracking progress, or when a task has 3+ steps. Triggers on "plan", "todo", "task list", "break down", "step by step", or complex requests requiring multiple actions.
development
Brainstorm startup ideas using top-founder mental models, trend analysis, and competition research. Use when the user wants to brainstorm startup ideas, explore business opportunities, validate concepts, or think like elite founders. Triggers on "startup ideas", "business ideas", "what should I build", "startup brainstorm", "idea validation", "trends and opportunities", "think like a founder".
tools
Create new Jazz skills for automating workflows. Use when the user asks to create a skill, make a skill, or wants to define custom automation behavior.
tools
Generate pull request titles and descriptions from diffs and context. Use when creating a PR, writing PR description, drafting merge request, or summarizing changes for review.