research
Systematic technical investigation—evidence gathering, option comparison, and actionable recommendations. Use when the user asks to "research X", "investigate Y", "look into Z", "compare X vs Y", "how does X work", or needs analysis of libraries, APIs, frameworks, or architectural approaches.
93
Quality
91%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description with excellent trigger term coverage and complete what/when guidance. The main weakness is that the capability description uses somewhat abstract terms ('evidence gathering', 'option comparison') rather than concrete actions, and the broad trigger terms like 'research' could potentially conflict with other skills.
Suggestions
Make capabilities more concrete by specifying actions like 'analyze documentation, benchmark alternatives, evaluate trade-offs, summarize findings'
Add distinguishing qualifiers to reduce conflict risk, such as specifying this is for 'technical/engineering research' vs general research or documentation lookup
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (technical investigation) and lists some actions (evidence gathering, option comparison, actionable recommendations), but these are somewhat abstract rather than concrete specific actions like 'analyze API documentation' or 'benchmark performance'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (systematic technical investigation with evidence gathering, option comparison, recommendations) AND when (explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger phrases and specific use cases). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'research X', 'investigate Y', 'look into Z', 'compare X vs Y', 'how does X work', plus domain terms like 'libraries, APIs, frameworks, architectural approaches'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it specifies 'technical investigation' and lists specific domains (libraries, APIs, frameworks), terms like 'research' and 'how does X work' could overlap with documentation skills or general Q&A skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is an excellent skill file that provides systematic, actionable guidance for technical research. It efficiently covers the complete research workflow with concrete tool usage, evaluation criteria, and output templates. The content respects Claude's intelligence while adding genuine value through structured checklists and decision-making frameworks.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, assuming Claude's competence as a staff-level engineer. No unnecessary explanations of basic concepts; every section provides actionable guidance without padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete tool commands (WebSearch, Context7, Grep/Glob), specific investigation checklists for different research types, and a copy-paste ready output template with markdown structure. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear 5-step workflow with explicit sequencing (Scope → Gather → Evaluate → Synthesize → Cite). Each step has concrete substeps and the source evaluation hierarchy provides a validation framework for research quality. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured overview with clear sections. References to external files (references/patterns.md, skills/FRAMEWORKS.md, RECIPE.md) are one level deep and clearly signaled in 'Reference Material' and 'See Also' sections. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- tslateman/duet
- Commit
e9df33d
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
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.