Agent Skills: Research

This skill should be used when researching best practices, evaluating technologies, comparing approaches, or when "research", "evaluation", or "comparison" are mentioned.

UncategorizedID: outfitter-dev/agents/research

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/outfitter-dev/agents/tree/HEAD/plugins/outfitter/skills/research

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for research.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

plugins/outfitter/skills/research/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
research
Description
This skill should be used when researching best practices, evaluating technologies, comparing approaches, or when "research", "evaluation", or "comparison" are mentioned.

Research

Systematic investigation → evidence-based analysis → authoritative recommendations.

Steps

  1. Define scope and evaluation criteria
  2. Discover sources using MCP tools (context7, octocode, firecrawl)
  3. Gather information with multi-source approach
  4. Load the outfitter:report-findings skill for synthesis
  5. Compile report with confidence levels and citations

<when_to_use>

  • Technology evaluation and comparison
  • Documentation discovery and troubleshooting
  • Best practices and industry standards research
  • Implementation guidance with authoritative sources

NOT for: quick lookups, well-known patterns, time-critical debugging without investigation stage

</when_to_use>

<stages>

Load the maintain-tasks skill for stage tracking. Stages advance only, never regress.

| Stage | Trigger | activeForm | |-------|---------|------------| | Analyze Request | Session start | "Analyzing research request" | | Discover Sources | Criteria defined | "Discovering sources" | | Gather Information | Sources identified | "Gathering information" | | Synthesize Findings | Information gathered | "Synthesizing findings" | | Compile Report | Synthesis complete | "Compiling report" |

Workflow:

  • Start: Create "Analyze Request" as in_progress
  • Transition: Mark current completed, add next in_progress
  • Simple queries: Skip directly to "Gather Information" if unambiguous
  • Gaps during synthesis: Add new "Gather Information" task
  • Early termination: Skip to "Compile Report" with caveats
</stages> <methodology>

Five-stage systematic approach:

1. Question Stage — Define scope

  • Decision to be made?
  • Evaluation parameters? (performance, maintainability, security, adoption)
  • Constraints? (timeline, expertise, infrastructure)

2. Discovery Stage — Multi-source retrieval

| Use Case | Primary | Secondary | Tertiary | |----------|---------|-----------|----------| | Official docs | context7 | octocode | firecrawl | | Troubleshooting | octocode issues | firecrawl community | context7 guides | | Code examples | octocode repos | firecrawl tutorials | context7 examples | | Technology eval | Parallel all | Cross-reference | Validate |

3. Evaluation Stage — Analyze against criteria

| Criterion | Metrics | |-----------|---------| | Performance | Benchmarks, latency, throughput, memory | | Maintainability | Code complexity, docs quality, community activity | | Security | CVEs, audits, compliance | | Adoption | Downloads, production usage, industry patterns |

4. Comparison Stage — Systematic tradeoff analysis

For each option: Strengths → Weaknesses → Best fit → Deal breakers

5. Recommendation Stage — Clear guidance with rationale

Primary recommendation → Alternatives → Implementation steps → Limitations

</methodology> <tools>

Three MCP servers for multi-source research:

| Tool | Best For | Key Functions | |------|----------|---------------| | context7 | Official docs, API refs | resolve-library-id, get-library-docs | | octocode | Code examples, issues | packageSearch, githubSearchCode, githubSearchIssues | | firecrawl | Tutorials, benchmarks | search, scrape, map |

Execution patterns:

  • Parallel: Run independent queries simultaneously for speed
  • Fallback: context7 → octocode → firecrawl if primary fails
  • Progressive: Start broad, narrow based on findings

See tool-selection.md for detailed usage.

</tools>

<discovery_patterns>

Common research workflows:

| Scenario | Approach | |----------|----------| | Library Installation | Package search → Official docs → Installation guide | | Error Resolution | Parse error → Search issues → Official troubleshooting → Community solutions | | API Exploration | Documentation ID → API reference → Real usage examples | | Technology Comparison | Parallel all sources → Cross-reference → Build matrix → Recommend |

See discovery-patterns.md for detailed workflows.

</discovery_patterns>

<findings_format>

Two output modes:

Evaluation Mode (recommendations):

Finding: { assertion }
Source: { authoritative source with link }
Confidence: High/Medium/Low — { rationale }

Discovery Mode (gathering):

Found: { what was discovered }
Source: { where from with link }
Notes: { context or caveats }

</findings_format>

<response_structure>

## Research Summary
Brief overview — what investigated, sources consulted.

## Options Discovered
1. **Option A** — description
2. **Option B** — description

## Comparison Matrix
| Criterion | Option A | Option B |
|-----------|----------|----------|

## Recommendation
### Primary: [Option Name]
**Rationale**: reasoning + evidence
**Confidence**: level + explanation

### Alternatives
When to choose differently.

## Implementation Guidance
Next steps, common pitfalls, validation.

## Sources
- Official, benchmarks, case studies, community

</response_structure>

<quality>

Always include:

  • Direct citations with links
  • Confidence levels and limitations
  • Context about when recommendations may not apply

Always validate:

  • Version is latest stable
  • Documentation matches user context
  • Critical info cross-referenced
  • Code examples complete and runnable

Proactively flag:

  • Deprecated approaches with modern alternatives
  • Missing prerequisites
  • Common pitfalls and gotchas
  • Related tools in ecosystem
</quality> <rules>

ALWAYS:

  • Create "Analyze Request" todo at session start
  • One stage in_progress at a time
  • Use multi-source approach (context7, octocode, firecrawl)
  • Provide direct citations with links
  • Cross-reference critical information
  • Include confidence levels and limitations

NEVER:

  • Skip "Analyze Request" stage without defining scope
  • Single-source when multi-source available
  • Deliver recommendations without citations
  • Include deprecated approaches without flagging
  • Omit limitations and edge cases
</rules> <references>

Research vs Report-Findings:

  • This skill (research) covers the full investigation workflow using MCP tools
  • report-findings skill covers synthesis, source assessment, and presentation

Use research for technology evaluation, documentation discovery, and best practices research. Load report-findings during synthesis stage for source authority assessment and confidence calibration.

</references>