Deep Research
Repeatable workflow for complex questions requiring evidence synthesis & structured reporting.
Purpose
- •Scoped, multi-phase research
- •Gather & evaluate diverse sources w/ quality checks
- •Synthesize into themes, patterns, gaps, recommendations
- •Traceable citations
Core Principles
- •Scope First: Define questions, criteria, constraints before search
- •Source Diversity: Multiple independent sources, prefer primary
- •Evidence Grading: Record recency, authority, confidence
- •Synthesis > Summary: Themes, patterns, gaps
- •Reproducibility: Track inputs, queries, decisions
Rules
Scope Definition
Capture main question, subquestions, success criteria, constraints, deliverables before search.
See doc/research_plan_template.md.
Source Collection
Collect 10-15+ sources across categories (official docs, academic, benchmarks, practitioner reports). Record author, date, link.
Source Evaluation
Score each for currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, purpose. Summarize confidence.
See doc/source_evaluation.md (CRAAP framework).
Deep Dive
Prioritize where importance & uncertainty high. Use citation chaining & triangulation.
Synthesis
Group by theme, identify patterns, capture gaps w/ confidence levels.
See doc/findings_template.md.
Reporting
Executive summary, methodology, findings, comparisons, recommendations, risks, references.
Use doc/final_report_template.md.
Automation (Optional)
Scripts = helpers, not substitutes. Doc assumptions & inputs.
Decision Framework
High impact, ambiguous, controversial: → Full deep research workflow Well-known, low impact: → Lightweight scan, cite 2-3 sources Time constrained: → Full workflow but reduced depth, doc limitations
Examples
Tech Evaluation
Compare Next.js vs Remix for SSR → structured report w/ scope, benchmarks, ecosystem, decision matrix, recommendations.
Market Research
AI coding assistant market → report w/ market signals, vendor positioning, trend analysis, confidence levels, gaps.
Edge Cases
- •Limited sources: doc gap, lower confidence, avoid strong recs
- •Conflicting evidence: present competing views, explain weighting
- •Paywalled: use abstracts/secondary, note limitations
- •Tight deadlines: reduce depth, keep methodology & limitations explicit
Related: thinking_framework, documentation, security_experts
See COMMON.md.
Tools: bin/search_and_analyze.py, bin/synthesize.py, bin/report_generator.py