Deep Research Framework

A structured deep-research skill for producing rigorous, balanced, and actionable research reports on any topic.

Overview

This skill enforces a disciplined research methodology. It is NOT a simple "search and summarize" tool. It demands evidence quality control, counterevidence inclusion, and honest flagging of gaps.

Outputs:

1. Structured Research Report — full-depth analysis organized by dimensions
2. One-Page Summary Card — key findings, confidence levels, and action items

Phase 0 — Pre-Research Clarification

Before starting research, confirm these inputs from the user or infer them from context:

If the topic is ambiguous, ask ONE clarifying question before proceeding.

Phase 1 — Research Design

1.1 Define the Research Objective

State in 1–2 sentences: What question is this research answering, and what decision or understanding will it enable?

1.2 Define the Audience

State who will read this: their background, what they already know, and what they need to walk away with.

1.3 Scope and Constraints

• Time scope: Which period does the research cover?
• Geographic scope: Global? China? Specific region?
• Exclusions: What is explicitly out of scope?

1.4 Decompose into Research Dimensions

Break the topic into 4–7 dimensions. For each dimension:

• Write 2–4 key questions that need answering
• Assign a priority: Core / Supporting / Context

Use references/dimension-templates.md for standard dimension sets by research type (industry, technology, company, product, market).

Phase 2 — Multi-Source Research Execution

2.1 Source Strategy

For each dimension, gather from at least 2–3 distinct source types:

See references/credibility-rubric.md for detailed credibility rating rules.

2.2 Search Execution

For each research dimension:

1. Formulate targeted search queries (try multiple angles)
2. Retrieve results using web_search or available tools
3. For each piece of evidence, record: claim, source, credibility rating, date

2.3 Counterevidence Requirement (MANDATORY)

For every major claim in the report, actively search for contradicting evidence:

• If counterevidence exists: include it alongside the main claim, labeled [反面证据]
• If no counterevidence found: note [未发现明显反面证据，可信度待验]
• NEVER omit counterevidence to make the report cleaner or more conclusive

2.4 Conflicting Information Handling

When two credible sources contradict each other:

• Present BOTH positions side-by-side
• Note the source, date, and credibility of each
• Do NOT pick a side unless evidence weight is clearly asymmetric
• Label the conflict: [矛盾信息 — 并列呈现]

2.5 Information Gap Flagging (MANDATORY)

When a key question cannot be answered from available sources:

• Mark it clearly: [信息不足 — 无法得出可靠结论]
• State what type of source would be needed to fill the gap
• NEVER fabricate data, statistics, or citations to fill gaps

Phase 3 — Synthesis and Analysis

3.1 Evidence Weighting

Synthesize findings dimension by dimension:

• Higher-credibility sources take precedence
• Recent data (within 12 months) takes precedence over older data
• Consensus across multiple independent sources strengthens confidence

3.2 Insight Generation

Go beyond summarizing to identify:

• Key patterns and trends
• Surprising or counterintuitive findings
• Implications for the research objective
• Open questions that remain after research

3.3 Confidence Levels

Assign a confidence level to each major finding:

Phase 4 — Output Delivery

4.1 Full Research Report

Follow the template in assets/report-template.md. Structure:

1. 研究概览 — objective, audience, scope, date
2. 执行摘要 — 5–7 bullet key findings with confidence levels
3. 维度分析 — one section per dimension with:
   • Key findings
   • Supporting evidence (with source + credibility)
   • Counterevidence
   • Confidence level
   • Information gaps (if any)
4. 矛盾与争议 — consolidated list of conflicting information
5. 综合洞察 — cross-dimension synthesis and implications
6. 信息缺口清单 — all flagged gaps in one place
7. 参考资料 — all sources with credibility ratings

4.2 One-Page Summary Card

Follow the template in assets/summary-card-template.md. Deliver after the full report.

The card contains:

• Topic + audience + date (header)
• 3 most important findings (with confidence)
• 1 most important counterpoint
• 1 key uncertainty / gap
• Suggested next actions (if applicable)
• Overall research confidence score (High / Medium / Low)

Quality Checklist (self-check before delivery)

Before presenting the output, verify:

• Every major claim has a cited source with credibility rating
• Counterevidence section is non-empty or explicitly noted
• All conflicting information is presented side-by-side, not resolved by choosing one
• All information gaps are explicitly labeled
• No statistics or citations were fabricated
• Confidence levels are assigned to all major findings
• One-page summary card is included
• Report follows the template structure

Important Rules

1. No fabrication: If data doesn't exist, say so. Never invent statistics, quotes, or citations.
2. No false certainty: Do not present uncertain findings as definitive.
3. Counterevidence is mandatory: A report without counterevidence is incomplete.
4. Conflicting sources must coexist: Do not silently pick one side.
5. Credibility must be visible: Every claim should be traceable to a rated source.