About research-digest
A research skill that turns RSS feeds, web sources, and industry publications into structured briefs. It is intended for research and content workflows, with source evaluation, cross-checking, and explicit treatment of conflicting views.
Key features
- 01Collect RSS, web, and curated sources
- 02Assess credibility, recency, and relevance
- 03Cross-reference findings across sources
- 04Extract trends, data, and expert views
- 05Produce cited, structured research briefs
Use cases
- 01Prepare a brief on a recent industry topic
- 02Compare findings across publications
- 03Identify opposing views and evidence
- 04Create a report with source attribution
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
$
npx skills add https:/After installing, type/research-digestin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled files
References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.
EXAMPLES.mdLICENSEREFERENCE.mdDetails
From the project READMEResearch Digest
Generate structured research briefs from RSS feeds, web sources, and industry publications.
Install
git clone https://github.com/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing.git && cp -r claude-marketing/skills/research-digest ~/.claude/skills/
Core Capabilities
- Pull from RSS feeds, web search, and curated sources
- Assess source credibility and recency
- Cross-reference findings across multiple sources
- Extract trends, data points, and expert opinions
- Identify counter-arguments and nuance
- Produce actionable research briefs
Workflow
1. Source Collection
Gather raw material from:
- RSS feeds — industry blogs, news sites, newsletters (via any RSS reader/API)
- Web search — targeted queries for recent coverage
- Industry reports — analyst reports, whitepapers, earnings calls
- Social/community — Reddit, Twitter/X, LinkedIn discussions
2. Source Assessment
Evaluate each source on:
| Criterion | Weight | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Credibility | 30% | Original research > analysis > aggregation > opinion |
| Recency | 25% | Last 7 days > 30 days > 90 days > older |
| Relevance | 25% | Directly on topic > adjacent > tangential |
| Uniqueness | 20% | Novel data > unique angle > common knowledge |
3. Synthesis
- Identify convergent themes (3+ sources saying the same thing)
- Flag divergent views (contradictions between sources)
- Extract specific data points with citations
- Note the "so what" — why this matters for the target audience
4. Brief Generation
Produce a structured markdown brief.
Brief Structure
# Research Brief: [Topic]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Depth:** Quick scan / Standard / Deep dive
**Sources reviewed:** [count]
## Executive Summary
- [Key finding 1]
- [Key finding 2]
- [Key finding 3]
## Key Findings
### Finding 1: [Headline]
[2-3 paragraph analysis with source citations]
### Finding 2: [Headline]
[2-3 paragraph analysis with source citations]
## Data Points
| Metric | Value | Source | Date |
|--------|-------|--------|------|
## Expert Perspectives
- "[Quote]" — [Name, Title, Source]
## Counter-Arguments & Nuance
- [Opposing view with source]
## Content Angles
- [Angle 1: how to use this research in content]
- [Angle 2]
## Sources
1. [Source name] — [URL] — [Credibility: High/Medium/Low]
Options
| Option | Values | Default |
|---|---|---|
| Time range | 24h, 7d, 30d, 90d | 7d |
| Depth | quick, standard, deep | standard |
| Focus | topic keyword or category | required |
| Output | brief, report, raw-notes | brief |
Quality Standards
- Minimum 3 independent sources per key finding
- Recency bias toward last 30 days unless historical context is needed
- Always include counter-arguments — at least one contrarian or skeptical view
- Separate facts from opinions — clearly label which is which
- Link to original sources — never cite without attribution
- No speculation — if data is missing, say so rather than guessing
For source credibility framework and synthesis methodology, see REFERENCE.md.
Comments
Markdown supported