git:20260902.c8f7e8d to git:20260908.addad86

---

name: research-methodology

description: >-

Plan, conduct, evaluate, and synthesize rigorous research investigations with credible

license: MIT

compatibility: No runtime dependency. Use appropriate retrieval tools and retain source URLs and access dates in the research log.

metadata:

source_repo: https://github.com/magnus919/hermes-profiles

source_commit: 867a555

---

# Research Methodology

Professional research process for a subagent. Three tracks based on the type of research:

- **Journalistic** — investigative pieces, primary source research, source-heavy narrative work

- **Industry analysis** — market research and strategy, signal detection

- **Academic/Comprehensive** — deep systematic research when depth matters most

All three share the same lifecycle (Scope → Gather → Evaluate → Analyze → Synthesize → Report) but differ in evidence standards, speed, and output format.

## When not to use

Do **not** load this skill for:

- A single factual lookup or a quick answer — respond directly; a full research lifecycle adds cost without adding credibility.

- Direct implementation work that needs no investigation — build and verify the change instead (`backend-engineering`, `frontend-engineering`).

- Operating a specific retrieval or capture tool — load that tool's skill for runbook-level configuration and diagnostics.

- Raw capture of web content without evaluation or synthesis — the capture tool's own skill covers fetching; this skill starts where source evaluation begins.

- Structuring already-gathered findings into durable summaries, analysis files, and evidence dossiers — use `artifact-pyramids` for the output architecture.

- Persisting captured sources into durable notes across a repeated research-to-note sequence — use `research-and-vault`.

## The Research Lifecycle

```

SCOPE → GATHER → EVALUATE → ANALYZE → SYNTHESIZE → REPORT

```

## Durable Artifact Gate

Research is not complete when an agent has produced a plausible answer. It is complete when the reusable evidence and reasoning have been preserved in the durable format that is natural to the host system and its users.

Before reporting, make the preservation decision explicit:

1. **Identify the durable destination.** Use the host's normal long-lived research surface: linked knowledge records, a tracked report package, a research database, a project document, or another user-visible artifact. Do not leave the only useful output in chat, a transient workspace, or an untracked scratch file.

2. **Extract at the source's natural granularity.** Capture every distinct, reusable claim, data point, method, contradiction, and open question that materially changes future reasoning. Do not use a fixed atom, finding, or note count as a stopping rule. Continue until each retained source is accounted for in the extraction log.

3. **Preserve provenance and relationships.** Each durable artifact must retain its source URL or citation, access date, evidence strength, and links to the question, related artifacts, and any synthesis that depends on it.

4. **Separate extraction from synthesis.** A brief or report explains the conclusion; it does not replace the underlying evidence records. Preserve source-level records and reusable claims before compacting them into a synthesis.

5. **Record what was not preserved.** If a source was rejected, too weak, inaccessible, redundant, or out of scope, record that decision in the research log. A future researcher must be able to distinguish an intentional exclusion from an overlooked source.

The right artifact shape depends on the environment. Do not assume a particular database, note-taking application, or orchestration system. The invariant is durable, navigable, evidence-linked research that a later user or agent can discover and build on.

## Interruption and Timeout Recovery

A research worker timeout is an interruption, not a research result. Never close the investigation, summarize it as complete, or infer that no useful work exists because a delegated worker exceeded its execution cap. Long research jobs commonly encounter slow extraction, rate limits, or one unresponsive source after producing valuable partial work. Plan long research as bounded, resumable subtasks: use task-appropriate execution windows, write incremental checkpoints, and resume from the latest verified checkpoint instead of imposing arbitrary short caps or assuming an unbounded window is available.

When a worker times out:

1. Read the complete delegation transcript and inspect the workspace or scratch directory before deciding what was lost.

2. Recover and verify every partial artifact, source log, and extracted claim already written.

3. Resume from the last durable checkpoint rather than restarting broad discovery.

4. Narrow or replace the slow operation, especially large PDF extraction or repeated rate-limited search, and write each subsequent stage incrementally.

5. If the worker cannot be resumed safely, continue the missing research directly or split it into smaller bounded tasks. A timeout changes the execution path, not the acceptance criteria.

6. Do not report completion until the research question is covered, retained sources and claims are represented in the durable evidence artifacts, and unresolved gaps are explicit.

The acceptance gate is evidence completeness and artifact verification, not elapsed time, worker status, or the existence of a plausible partial summary.

## Reference Files

### Tracks

| Track | Reference | When to load |

|-------|-----------|-------------|

| **Journalistic** | `references/journalistic-research.md` | You're researching an investigative piece — primary sources, interviews, documents, series management, pre-publication verification |

| **Industry analysis** | `references/industry-analysis.md` | You're researching an industry analysis piece — signal detection, corporate evidence, competitive intelligence, case study standards |

| **Academic / Comprehensive** | `references/research-lifecycle.md` | You're doing deep systematic research — question scoping, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria |

### Shared Methodology

| Reference | When to load |

|-----------|-------------|

| `references/source-evaluation.md` | You need to judge whether a source is credible — CRAAP test, triangulation, reliability tiers |

| `references/structured-analytic-techniques.md` | You need to evaluate competing explanations — ACH, driving forces, pre-mortem, indicators |

| `references/synthesis-patterns.md` | You need to combine findings from multiple sources into synthesized conclusions |

| `references/technical-verification.md` | You need to test a technical claim by reproducing it — benchmarks, API behavior, configuration |

### Assets

| Asset | What it produces |

|-------|-----------------|

| `assets/research-brief.md` | Structured brief with findings, confidence assessment, evidence table, open questions |

| `assets/research-log.md` | Traceable record of searches, sources, and decisions |

Use both assets for every substantial investigation. Before closing the work, complete their durable-artifact sections and verify that retained sources and extracted claims are represented in the destination system.

## Pre-Publication Gateway

For any piece that makes factual claims, load the relevant track's verification protocol before reporting back:

- **Journalistic:** 7-step pre-publication protocol from `references/journalistic-research.md`

- **Industry:** 7-step research protocol from `references/industry-analysis.md`

- **Technical:** 5-step reproduction protocol from `references/technical-verification.md`

## Portability

This skill is intentionally host-neutral. Use your agent's normal mechanisms to load the references, templates, and scripts listed here. Do not assume a particular profile system, task orchestrator, memory service, or response-handoff format.