Deep research on any topic using parallel sub-agents and built-in tools only (WebSearch/WebFetch + free APIs, no keys). Use when the user asks for a thorough multi-source investigation with a cited report — "深度调研X"、"deep research"、"帮我全面研究一下"、"多方求证"、"写一份调研报告". NOT for simple lookups (single WebSearch suffices) and NOT for academic literature surveys (use auto-research skill instead).
74
92%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Orchestrate parallel research sub-agents, then write one coherent cited report. Research is parallel; writing is single-point — never let multiple agents write report sections.
date +%Y-%m-%d via Bash. Never assume the current year from training data.| Mode | Sub-agents (round 1) | Max follow-up rounds | Sources target |
|---|---|---|---|
| quick | 2-3 | 0 | 8+ |
| standard | 3-5 | 1 | 15+ |
| deep | 5-8 | 2 | 25+ |
These are hard budgets. Reflection (Phase 4) can spend them but never exceed them.
All state lives on disk at ./research/<slug>/ — never only in context (survives compaction):
research/<slug>/
├── brief.md # research brief — the single contract for all phases
├── findings/ # F1.md, F2.md ... one per sub-agent, structured evidence
└── REPORT.md # final deliverableOn resume: re-read brief.md + list findings/, skip completed angles, continue.
Ask at most one round of clarifying questions (AskUserQuestion), only if genuinely ambiguous: audience, time frame, region, decision at stake. If the user said "just run it" or intent is clear, skip asking and write assumptions into the brief instead.
Then write brief.md: refined question, scope boundaries (in/out), assumptions, depth mode, today's date. This brief — not the raw conversation — is what every later phase measures against.
Decompose the brief into 3-8 independent research angles. Pull from these lenses as applicable: core facts/definitions · recent developments (last 12 months) · quantitative data/benchmarks · counter-arguments & failure cases · practitioner experience (forums, issues) · academic work · key players/alternatives.
List angles in brief.md under ## Angles. For deep mode or contested topics, show the angle list to the user for a quick confirm before spending budget.
Spawn one sub-agent per angle in a single message (parallel). Build each prompt from the locked template in reference/subagent-prompt.md — reproduce it verbatim, replacing only the {variables}. Each sub-agent:
findings/F<n>.md (claim / quote / URL / date / confidence per item)If a sub-agent fails or returns thin results, note it and move on; do not block other angles.
Read all findings/*.md. Against brief.md, ask: which parts of the brief have no evidence? Which major claims rest on a single source? Where do sources conflict?
You alone write REPORT.md in one pass, following reference/report.md. Core rules:
[n] mapping to a Sources section; citation URLs come only from findings files — never from memory.[single source], speculation with [speculative].For deep mode, before finalizing do one critique pass: reread the report as a skeptical reviewer (unsupported claims? stale data? missing counter-view?) and fix in place.
Finally, give the user a 5-10 line summary of key conclusions and the report path.
f0293bf
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.