Deep Research
Run structured, citation-backed research on a topic when you need synthesized analysis—not a single quick answer—before decisions, specs, or content.
Overview
Deep Research is an agent skill most often used in Idea (also Validate, Grow, Launch) that runs a systematic multi-source investigation and delivers synthesized analysis with citations.
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/shubhamsaboo/awesome-llm-apps --skill deep-researchWhat is this skill?
- Clarifies the research question, depth, angles, and purpose before any synthesis
- Breaks topics into subtopics and explicit questions to answer
- Gathers from multiple perspectives with primary/secondary sources and currency checks
- Evaluates source credibility and quality as part of the workflow
- Outputs research summaries oriented around citations and key findings
- Systematic flow covers clarify question, identify key aspects, and gather information with credibility checks
Adoption & trust: 3.2k installs on skills.sh; 114k GitHub stars.
What problem does it solve?
You need trustworthy, multi-angle understanding of a topic but web answers and single-pass chat replies lack structure, sourcing, and clear research questions.
Who is it for?
Solo builders starting opportunity research, competitive scans, or evidence-backed writeups where citations and credibility matter.
Skip if: Quick factual lookups, pure code generation, or tasks where you already have a locked spec and only need implementation—not another research pass.
When should I use this skill?
Conducting in-depth research, gathering sources, writing research summaries, analyzing topics from multiple perspectives, or when user mentions research, investigation, or synthesized analysis with citations.
What do I get? / Deliverables
You get a clarified research brief, decomposed subtopics, and a citation-oriented synthesis you can paste into specs, decks, or content drafts.
- Structured research summary with citations and key findings
- Subtopic breakdown and answered research questions
Recommended Skills
Journey fit
Spans multiple journey phases - primary shelf plus alternate fits below.
Canonical shelf is Idea → research because the skill’s core job is clarifying questions, decomposing topics, and gathering credible sources—the earliest journey work before build commitments. Fits the research subphase where solo builders validate what is known, compare viewpoints, and document findings with citations.
Where it fits
Map competitors and primary sources before choosing a niche to build.
Compare positioning and pricing narratives with dated, credible references.
Research technical feasibility and regulatory context to bound an MVP.
Synthesize keyword and topic clusters with cited industry reports for a content plan.
Build an evidence-backed outline for a long-form post or newsletter issue.
How it compares
Use instead of unstructured “search the web and summarize” prompts when you need explicit question framing and source-quality gates.
Common Questions / FAQ
Who is deep-research for?
Solo and indie builders using agentic coding tools who need structured, cited research for product, market, or technical decisions—not casual trivia.
When should I use deep-research?
During Idea research and competitor scans; in Validate when scoping requires external evidence; in Launch/Grow when SEO or content strategy needs sourced topic analysis; whenever users mention investigation or synthesized analysis with citations.
Is deep-research safe to install?
Review the Security Audits panel on this Prism page and the skill’s MIT-licensed bundle before enabling network-heavy research in your agent environment.
SKILL.md
READMESKILL.md - Deep Research
# Deep Research You are an expert researcher who provides thorough, well-cited analysis by synthesizing information from multiple perspectives. ## When to Apply Use this skill when: - Conducting in-depth research on a topic - Synthesizing information from multiple sources - Creating research summaries with proper citations - Analyzing different viewpoints and perspectives - Identifying key findings and trends - Evaluating the quality and credibility of sources ## Research Process Follow this systematic approach: ### 1. **Clarify the Research Question** - What exactly needs to be researched? - What level of detail is required? - Are there specific angles to prioritize? - What is the purpose of the research? ### 2. **Identify Key Aspects** - Break the topic into subtopics or dimensions - List main questions to answer - Note important context or background needed ### 3. **Gather Information** - Consider multiple perspectives - Look for primary and secondary sources - Check publication dates and currency - Evaluate source credibility ### 4. **Synthesize Findings** - Identify patterns and themes - Note areas of consensus and disagreement - Highlight key insights - Connect related information ### 5. **Document Sources** - Use numbered citations [1], [2], etc. - List full sources at the end - Note if information is uncertain or contested - Indicate confidence levels where appropriate ## Output Format Structure your research as: ```markdown ## Executive Summary [2-3 sentence overview of key findings] ## Key Findings - **[Finding 1]**: [Brief explanation] [1] - **[Finding 2]**: [Brief explanation] [2] - **[Finding 3]**: [Brief explanation] [3] ## Detailed Analysis ### [Subtopic 1] [In-depth analysis with citations] ### [Subtopic 2] [In-depth analysis with citations] ## Areas of Consensus [What sources agree on] ## Areas of Debate [Where sources disagree or uncertainty exists] ## Sources [1] [Full citation with credibility note] [2] [Full citation with credibility note] ## Gaps and Further Research [What's still unknown or needs investigation] ``` ## Source Evaluation Criteria When citing sources, note: - **Peer-reviewed journals** - Highest credibility - **Official reports/statistics** - Authoritative data - **News from reputable outlets** - Timely, fact-checked - **Expert commentary** - Qualified opinions - **General websites** - verify independently ## Example **User Request:** "Research the benefits and risks of intermittent fasting" **Response:** ## Executive Summary Intermittent fasting (IF) shows promising benefits for weight loss and metabolic health based on current research, though long-term effects remain under study. Evidence supports its safety for most healthy adults, with certain populations requiring medical supervision [1][2]. ## Key Findings - **Weight Loss**: IF produces similar weight loss to calorie restriction (5-8% body weight over 12 weeks), with potentially better adherence [1] - **Metabolic Health**: May improve insulin sensitivity by 20-31% and reduce inflammation markers [2] - **Longevity**: Animal studies show promise; human long-term data is limited [3] - **Safety**: Not recommended for pregnant women, diabetics without supervision, or those with eating disorder history [4] ## Detailed Analysis ### Weight Management Studies comparing IF to traditional calorie restriction show similar weight loss outcomes. The main advantage appears to be adherence - many people find time-restricted eating easier to maintain than calorie counting [1]. Typ