skills/wsf-research-phase/SKILL.md
Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use /wsf-plan-phase instead)
npx skillsauth add sampx/agent-tools wsf-research-phaseInstall 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.
Note: This is a standalone research command. For most workflows, use /wsf-plan-phase which integrates research automatically.
Use this command when:
Orchestrator role: Parse phase, validate against roadmap, check existing research, gather context, spawn researcher agent, present results.
Why subagent: Research burns context fast (WebSearch, Context7 queries, source verification). Fresh 200k context for investigation. Main context stays lean for user interaction. </objective>
<available_agent_types> Valid WSF subagent types (use exact names — do not fall back to 'general-purpose'):
Normalize phase input in step 1 before any directory lookups. </context>
<process>INIT=$(node "/Users/sam/coding/wopal/wopal-workspace/.wopal/wsf/bin/wsf-tools.cjs" init phase-op "$ARGUMENTS")
if [[ "$INIT" == @file:* ]]; then INIT=$(cat "${INIT#@file:}"); fi
Extract from init JSON: phase_dir, phase_number, phase_name, phase_found, commit_docs, has_research, state_path, requirements_path, context_path, research_path.
Resolve researcher model:
RESEARCHER_MODEL=$(node "/Users/sam/coding/wopal/wopal-workspace/.wopal/wsf/bin/wsf-tools.cjs" resolve-model wsf-phase-researcher --raw)
PHASE_INFO=$(node "/Users/sam/coding/wopal/wopal-workspace/.wopal/wsf/bin/wsf-tools.cjs" roadmap get-phase "${phase_number}")
If found is false: Error and exit. If found is true: Extract phase_number, phase_name, goal from JSON.
ls .planning/phases/${PHASE}-*/RESEARCH.md 2>/dev/null
If exists: Offer: 1) Update research, 2) View existing, 3) Skip. Wait for response.
If doesn't exist: Continue.
Use paths from INIT (do not inline file contents in orchestrator context):
requirements_pathcontext_pathstate_pathPresent summary with phase description and what files the researcher will load.
Research modes: ecosystem (default), feasibility, implementation, comparison.
<research_type>
Phase Research — investigating HOW to implement a specific phase well.
</research_type>
<key_insight>
The question is NOT "which library should I use?"
The question is: "What do I not know that I don't know?"
For this phase, discover:
- What's the established architecture pattern?
- What libraries form the standard stack?
- What problems do people commonly hit?
- What's SOTA vs what the agent's training thinks is SOTA?
- What should NOT be hand-rolled?
</key_insight>
<objective>
Research implementation approach for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
Mode: ecosystem
</objective>
<files_to_read>
- {requirements_path} (Requirements)
- {context_path} (Phase context from discuss-phase, if exists)
- {state_path} (Prior project decisions and blockers)
</files_to_read>
<additional_context>
**Phase description:** {phase_description}
</additional_context>
<downstream_consumer>
Your RESEARCH.md will be loaded by `/wsf-plan-phase` which uses specific sections:
- `## Standard Stack` → Plans use these libraries
- `## Architecture Patterns` → Task structure follows these
- `## Don't Hand-Roll` → Tasks NEVER build custom solutions for listed problems
- `## Common Pitfalls` → Verification steps check for these
- `## Code Examples` → Task actions reference these patterns
Be prescriptive, not exploratory. "Use X" not "Consider X or Y."
</downstream_consumer>
<quality_gate>
Before declaring complete, verify:
- [ ] All domains investigated (not just some)
- [ ] Negative claims verified with official docs
- [ ] Multiple sources for critical claims
- [ ] Confidence levels assigned honestly
- [ ] Section names match what plan-phase expects
</quality_gate>
<output>
Write to: .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md
</output>
Task(
prompt=filled_prompt,
subagent_type="wsf-phase-researcher",
model="{researcher_model}",
description="Research Phase {phase}"
)
## RESEARCH COMPLETE: Display summary, offer: Plan phase, Dig deeper, Review full, Done.
## CHECKPOINT REACHED: Present to user, get response, spawn continuation.
## RESEARCH INCONCLUSIVE: Show what was attempted, offer: Add context, Try different mode, Manual.
<objective>
Continue research for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
</objective>
<prior_state>
<files_to_read>
- .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md (Existing research)
</files_to_read>
</prior_state>
<checkpoint_response>
**Type:** {checkpoint_type}
**Response:** {user_response}
</checkpoint_response>
Task(
prompt=continuation_prompt,
subagent_type="wsf-phase-researcher",
model="{researcher_model}",
description="Continue research Phase {phase}"
)
</process>
<success_criteria>
tools
Configure ellamaka, a fork of OpenCode with wopal-space mode. MUST use for any task about ellamaka config, agent frontmatter, permission rules, model/provider selection, formatter settings, config loading order, or why config changes are ignored. Trigger on requests about ellamaka or opencode config files, agent permission overrides, restricting subagents, custom/plugin tool permissions (e.g. wopal_task_*), disabling tools, configuring providers or models, formatter setup, config precedence or layering, or debugging settings that do not take effect. Use this skill even when the user says "opencode" if the actual runtime, config path, or behavior is ellamaka. Prefer this skill whenever the answer depends on the difference between ellamaka and upstream opencode, including wopal-space config loading, plugin tool permissions, or agent frontmatter precedence.
development
Plan quality verification for dev-flow. Goal-backward analysis ensures plans WILL achieve their stated goal before execution burns context. ⚠️ MUST use when: (1) Reviewing Plan quality before approve (2) Wopal completes Plan writing and needs quality gate (3) User asks to "check plan", "verify plan", "review plan" (4) Plan enters planning status and needs pre-execution validation 🔴 Trigger automatically when Plan is ready for review, even if user doesn't explicitly say "review". Agent: rook (read-only verification subagent) Mode: verification, not execution
development
Review implementation results for goal achievement and code quality. Supports both Plan-backed review and planless diff review. ⚠️ MUST use when: (1) Wopal delegates rook to review fae implementation output, (2) Prompt contains "review_type: implementation", (3) Prompt contains changed code file list or Plan path + implementation scope, (4) Any code review request from Wopal. 🔴 Trigger even when user does not explicitly mention "review" if the task involves verifying implementation results. This skill is rook-exclusive (only rook agent can load it).
tools
Foundation rules for how Wopal collaborates with sub-agents such as fae and rook. ⚠️ MUST load before ANY delegation — covers delegation tool APIs, task lifecycle, notifications, status handling, and recovery. 🔴 Trigger: "delegate", "let fae implement", "fae task", "rook review", "check task status", "cancel task", "abort task", "agent collaboration", "委派", "让 fae 执行", "fae 任务", "rook 审查", "检查状态", or any intent to hand work to a sub-agent. 🔴 Never delegate without loading this skill first. Skipping it is serious negligence. Note: this skill does not include workflow-specific prompt templates such as dev-flow templates. Those belong to the corresponding workflow skills.