About deep-research
deep-research is a skill for evidence-based research, suited to complex questions and substantial research reports. It emphasizes primary sources, follow-up on consequential leads, and citations near supported claims.
Key features
- 01Set research scope and depth
- 02Prioritize primary sources
- 03Check contested evidence
- 04Place citations near claims
- 05Report evidence gaps and limits
Use cases
- 01Compare products or approaches
- 02Check contested empirical claims
- 03Prepare a cited research report
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/ / github.com/ petekp/ claude-code-setup --skill deep-researchAfter installing, type/deep-researchin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled files
References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.
references/reporting.mdsearch-strategies.mdsource-evaluation.mdDetails
From the project READMEDeep research
Establish the question, decision criteria, and requested depth from the task. Ask only for missing information that would materially change the research. Preserve the user's named topic or model in searches; do not replace an unfamiliar or fast-changing name with a familiar one.
Read primary sources and distinguish their claims from your interpretation. Use current local code for questions about the installed implementation. Follow leads and seek independent evidence where a consequential, contested, or empirical claim needs it. One authoritative source may settle a documented product fact; a fixed source count does not establish truth.
Use these references only when needed:
- Search strategies: discovery is stalled, terminology is unclear, or the question spans several kinds of sources.
- Source evaluation: sources conflict, evidence is indirect, or a study or benchmark needs scrutiny.
- Reporting: producing a substantial comparison or research artifact.
Answer with citations near the claims they support. Paraphrase sources, reserve short marked quotes for exact wording that matters, and organize around findings and disagreements rather than one summary per source. Use the host's citation format and quotation limits.
Continue until the requested questions are supported or the unresolved gaps are identified. Follow remaining leads that could change the answer within the agreed scope and budget. Report unavailable evidence and limitations; do not imply exhaustive coverage or start unrelated research to fill a template.