Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索操作浏览器github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

deep-research深入研究

Agent Skill

deep-research 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

906

周安装

37

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

290
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:deep-research(深入研究)
来源仓库:https://github.com/baphomet480/claude-skills
仓库路径:skills/deep-research
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/baphomet480/claude-skills --skill deep-research
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/baphomet480/claude-skills --skill deep-research

简介

深入研究技能生成高质量分析报告,包含图表、对比表格和综合叙述,适合技术决策参考。

  • 适用于在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。
  • 可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。
  • deep-research 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Deep Research

Produce Gemini Deep Research-quality output: rich artifacts with embedded screenshots, mermaid diagrams, comparison tables, and narrative synthesis. Tuned for developer decisions — framework selection, architecture patterns, dependency evaluation, competitive analysis.

When to Use This Skill

  • "Research the current state of X"
  • "Compare Framework A vs Framework B"
  • "What are the best approaches for..."
  • "Deep dive into..."
  • Any request where the answer requires synthesizing information from many sources

Do NOT use for: quick factual lookups, single-source answers, or "find me a CSS button" (use design-lookup instead).

Input Protocol — Before Any Search

  1. Decompose the topic into 3-5 research axes.

- Example: "Compare Next.js vs Remix" → Performance, DX, Ecosystem, Deployment, Community

  1. Identify the decision context — what is the user actually deciding?

- Framework choice? Architecture pattern? Build vs buy? Migration risk?

  1. Draft a research plan — present 3-5 axes with planned queries to the user.

- Save it as an artifact (e.g., research_plan.md). - Proceed on approval, or refine if the user redirects scope.

Phase 1: Breadth Scan

Goal: Map the landscape. Find *what exists* before reading anything.

  1. Run 5-8 parallel searches across different axes. Use at least two tools:

- search (Firecrawl) — broad topic queries - search_web (Google) — alternate search perspective - search with specific scrapeOptions — targeted discovery

  1. Dev-specific breadth:

- search_code or search_repositories — find relevant GitHub repos - Search npm trends, bundle sizes, download counts when evaluating packages - Search for migration stories: "migrating from X to Y" experience reports

  1. Collect 15-25 candidate URLs, not 5. Score each by authority tier (see references/research-heuristics.md).
  2. Do not stop at snippets. Snippets are for candidate selection only.

Output: Candidate source list with tier ratings. Present to user if interactive, or proceed if autonomous.

Phase 2: Deep Read

Goal: Extract actual content — implementation details, code examples, benchmarks, data.

  1. Select the top 8-12 sources from Phase 1 (prioritize S and A tier).
  2. Full extraction — get the complete page content:

- scrape (Firecrawl) or read_url_content for text-heavy pages - crawl (Firecrawl) to follow documentation multi-page structures - browser_subagent to screenshot key pages (UIs, dashboards, architecture diagrams) - get_file_contents (GitHub MCP) to read actual source code from repos

  1. Analyze each source:

- Extract specific claims, numbers, patterns, code examples - Note the authority tier and any bias (is this the framework's own marketing?) - Tag findings by research axis

  1. Self-correction: If a source is fluff (marketing-only, thin tutorial, SEO filler):

- Discard it - Run a refined follow-up search with more specific terms - Try adding: "benchmark", "technical deep dive", "lessons learned", "postmortem"

Output: Annotated source notes organized by axis.

Phase 3: Synthesis

Goal: Build the research briefing artifact. This is the main deliverable.

  1. Choose the report template from references/report-templates.md:

- Comprehensive Brief — for landscape/state-of-the-art research - Comparison Brief — for head-to-head evaluations

  1. Write the report as a rich markdown artifact:

- Narrative prose in the executive summary — not bullets, not lists. Write as if briefing a tech lead. - Comparison tables with real data extracted from sources - Mermaid diagrams for architecture, decision trees, ecosystem maps - Embedded screenshots captured via browser_subagent during Phase 2 - Code examples pulled from actual repos or docs - Use generate_image for custom visualizations when no screenshot captures the concept

  1. Cite every claim — link to the source URL inline. Use the format: [Source Name](URL).
  2. Gap analysis — explicitly call out:

- What couldn't be determined and why - Conflicting information between sources - Areas where only low-tier sources were found

Output: The research artifact (e.g., research_report.md).

Phase 4: Iteration

Goal: Fill gaps identified in Phase 3.

  1. Review the gap analysis section of your report.
  2. For each fillable gap:

- Run 1-2 targeted searches with refined queries - Extract and read the results - Update the report artifact in-place

  1. Max 3 total iterations (Phase 1-3 = round 1, then up to 2 more targeted rounds).
  2. After final iteration, mark remaining gaps as "Unresolved" with explanation.

Agentic Workflow & Vibe Coding

  • Iterative Synthesis: Do not expect a perfect, comprehensive report on the first draft. Write the initial synthesis, review the extracted data and formatting, isolate any specific gaps or broken diagrams, refine ONE section at a time, and regenerate until the artifact meets the briefing standards.
  • Vibe Coding: Commit your working markdown report and any local screenshots/assets locally *before* kicking off additional deep-read loops, ensuring you don't lose the structural foundation if a search goes off track.

Tool Strategy

PurposePrimaryFallback
Topic discoverysearch (Firecrawl)search_web
Delegated deep researchsearch + scrapeManual multi-search
Full page extractionscrape (Firecrawl)read_url_content
Multi-page docscrawl (Firecrawl)search + manual
Visual evidencebrowser_subagent (screenshot)generate_image
GitHub analysissearch_code, get_file_contentsread_url_content on raw GitHub
Architecture diagramsMermaid in markdowngenerate_image
Data visualizationMarkdown tablesgenerate_image for charts

Quality Gates

Before delivering the report, verify:

  • Source diversity — at least 1 S-tier and 2 A-tier sources cited (or explicitly flagged as unavailable)
  • Visual richness — at least 1 screenshot/image AND 1 diagram/table embedded
  • Narrative quality — executive summary reads as prose, not bullet points
  • Citation completeness — every factual claim links to a source
  • Gap transparency — gaps and conflicts are explicitly documented
  • Actionable output — recommendations section exists with ranked, specific advice

Anti-Patterns

  • Snippet-only research — stopping at search result descriptions without full extraction
  • Text-wall reports — no visuals, no tables, no diagrams. The whole point is richness.
  • Source-by-source organization — findings must be grouped thematically by research axis, not by URL
  • Single-tool reliance — use at least 2 different search/extraction tools for source diversity
  • Uncited claims — every substantive finding must link to its source
  • Marketing echo — repeating a framework's own marketing claims without independent verification
  • Premature stopping — delivering after 3-5 sources when the topic warrants 15+

Agentic OS Integration

If the current project root contains an .agent/ directory, this skill MUST participate in the Agentic OS shared-memory model.

At the end of your execution, check for .agent/state/last-run.json. If it exists, append or update the file using its required schema to log your run. Ensure you capture your runtime (agent_runtime), skill_executed, a concise summary, decisions, and next_steps.

References

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

33.78%
按下载量换算98

Claude

30.31%
按下载量换算88

Cursor

19.48%
按下载量换算56

Gemini CLI

10.18%
按下载量换算30

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

操作浏览器

该 Skill 可能涉及浏览器控制能力,使用时可能读取或操作网页内容,需要在受控环境中确认权限边界。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills