wigolo-research

Local-first multi-step research with question decomposition, parallel search, structured briefs, cross-references, and gap analysis. Use when the user needs comprehensive analysis, comparison reports, literature reviews, or says "research", "compare X vs Y", "deep dive", "thorough analysis", "find everything about". Returns a structured `brief` with `topics`, `highlights`, `key_findings`, `sections.overview.cross_references`, `sections.comparison`, `sections.gaps`.

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

wigolo research

Comprehensive multi-source research with structured output. Beats chaining search + fetch manually for multi-source synthesis.

Quick Reference

// Standard research
{ "question": "How does Deno 2 compare to Node.js for production?", "depth": "standard" }

// Comprehensive (more sources, deeper analysis)
{ "question": "SQLite vs PostgreSQL vs DuckDB for analytics", "depth": "comprehensive" }

// Quick factual check
{ "question": "What are the breaking changes in React 19?", "depth": "quick" }

// Domain-scoped research
{ "question": "Next.js App Router patterns", "depth": "standard", "include_domains": ["nextjs.org", "vercel.com"] }

// With structured output schema
{ "question": "Compare Prisma vs Drizzle vs TypeORM", "depth": "standard", "schema": { "type": "object", "properties": { "orm": { "type": "string" }, "bundle_size": { "type": "string" }, "type_safety": { "type": "string" } } } }

Depth Levels

Depth	Sub-queries	Sources	Time	Use case
`quick`	2-3	5-8	~15s	Quick factual check
`standard`	4-5	10-15	~40s	Normal research (default)
`comprehensive`	6-7	20-25	~80s	Deep comparison, full review

Override the source count for the chosen depth with max_sources (cap 50) — raise it to widen coverage, lower it to keep a run fast.

Output: Structured Brief

When MCP sampling is unavailable (common case), the output carries a brief:

{
  "brief": {
    "key_findings": [...],       // top passages across all sources — start report here
    "topics": [...],             // sources grouped by sub-query
    "sections": {
      "overview": { "cross_references": [...] },  // findings corroborated by 2+ sources — most reliable
      "comparison": {...},                         // entity-specific points for X vs Y queries
      "gaps": [...]                                // sub-queries / named entities with limited coverage
    }
  },
  "sub_queries": [...],
  "sources": [...],
  "query_type": "..."          // decomposition strategy used
}

Gaps surface named sub-entities that decomposition or search could not corroborate — never silently dropped.

Writing the Report

See wigolo/rules/synthesis.md. Quick version:

Start with key_findings for the executive summary.
Use sections.overview.cross_references for the most reliable claims.
Write sections from topics.
Build comparison table from sections.comparison (if present).
Note sections.gaps as limitations.
Cite with [N] format from citations.

Anti-Patterns

DON'T use for single-URL lookups — use fetch instead.
DON'T use for data gathering — use agent with a schema instead.
DON'T pre-probe cache before calling research — it checks internally.

When NOT to use wigolo-research

You want a single-shot search result, not a synthesized report — use search with format: "answer".