research-note-wrap（研究笔记包装）

research-note-wrap

Overview

Summarize the current session, or today's related sessions for a given topic, into an Obsidian Markdown note that is easy to review later. Prioritize core problems, comparative analysis, and clear conclusions over code detail or process narration.

Core Rules

• Write in Simplified Chinese by default.
• Prioritize logical conclusions over coding details.
• Do not produce a chronological 流水账.
• Use tables first when comparing multiple problems, hypotheses, conclusions, impacts, or next actions.
• After the tables, provide a short 关键结论 section.
• Only include code-level details when they are truly necessary to support the conclusion.
• If you mention a file, function, method, or code path, explain in Chinese:

- what it does - why it matters - how it supports the conclusion

• Default to writing the note file after confirmation; do not stop at chat-only output unless the user explicitly asks not to write a file.

Scope Decision

Default scope

If the user says things like:

• 总结调研
• 输出结论
• 总结分析
• 输出笔记
• 调研纪要
• 分析纪要
• 会话结论

Then summarize the current session only.

Cross-session scope

If the user says things like:

• 总结今天会话关于 xx 的分析
• 汇总今天关于 xx 的调研
• 总结今天相关会话中的 xx 问题

Then collect today's related sessions about the given topic and synthesize them into one note.

If the user explicitly provides another time range, follow that range. Otherwise, 近期 defaults to 当天.

Output Location Decision

Before writing the file:

1. Check whether the current project's AGENTS.md explicitly defines a default output directory for research / analysis summary notes.
2. If AGENTS.md already defines it, follow that path directly.
3. If it does not define a path, ask the user for the output directory the first time.
4. Once the user gives a path, use it for the current task. Suggest adding it to AGENTS.md if this is a recurring workflow.

Confirmation Workflow

Do not write the file immediately after the first draft. Use this confirmation sequence:

Step 1: Draft the main problems

Extract and compress the discussion into a high-density problem summary. Prefer a table like this:

## 问题对比表
| 问题 | 现象/信号 | 核心判断 | 当前结论 | 影响 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 问题 A | ... | ... | ... | ... |

Then ask the user to confirm whether these are the right 主要问题.

Step 2: Draft the conclusions

After the user confirms the problem framing, present the conclusions. Prefer a compact table first, then a short conclusion block:

## 结论对比表
| 主题 | 结论 | 依据 | 风险/边界 |
|---|---|---|---|
| xx | ... | ... | ... |

## 关键结论
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...

Then ask the user to confirm whether these are the right 结论.

Step 3: Write the note file

Only after both confirmations:

• finalize title
• finalize file path
• write the markdown file
• report the saved path back to the user

Output Structure

Use this structure by default. Keep it concise and dense.

---
title: <标题>
date: <YYYY-MM-DD>
project: <项目名或路径>
tags: [research, summary]
source: <current-session | today-topic-synthesis>
---

# <标题>

## 问题对比表
| 问题 | 现象/信号 | 核心判断 | 当前结论 | 影响 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

## 结论对比表
| 主题 | 结论 | 依据 | 风险/边界 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |

## 关键结论
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...

## 必要实现位点（仅在真的重要时）
| 位点 | 逻辑/作用 | 为什么关键 |
|---|---|---|
| `path:line` / `symbol` | 它负责什么 | 它如何支撑结论 |

## 未决项 / 后续建议
| 项目 | 说明 |
|---|---|
| ... | ... |

File Naming

Default filename format:

YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>.md

Examples:

• 2026-03-30-dsa-sidecar-pinned-ref.md
• 2026-03-30-hqchart-data-contract.md
• 2026-03-30-session-research.md

If the topic is unclear, use a short neutral fallback such as session-research.

Follow-up Research After Initial Output

If the user says things like:

• 再调研 xx 输出到文件中去
• 补充分析 xx 并写入笔记

Then:

1. Reuse the current note file by default.
2. Add a new section such as:

## 追加专题：xx

1. Only create a new file if the user explicitly asks for a separate note.

Writing Guidance

Good

• Compress repeated discussion into one row or one conclusion.
• Prefer contrast and synthesis.
• Keep wording human-readable and Chinese-first.
• Explain technical references in plain Chinese.

Avoid

• Long process transcripts
• Tool chatter
• Repeating the same conclusion in multiple bullets
• Dumping file paths or function names without explanation
• Overusing multi-level bullet lists when a table is clearer

Final Checklist

Before writing the file, verify:

• The scope is correct: current session or today's related sessions.
• The output path follows AGENTS.md, or has been explicitly confirmed with the user.
• The user has confirmed both:

- 主要问题 - 核心结论

• Tables carry the dense comparison content.
• 关键结论 appears after the tables.
• Code-level references, if any, are explained in Chinese.
• The filename matches YYYY-MM-DD-topic.md.