Research Report: [Topic]

<!-- ============================================================================= PROGRESSIVE FILE ASSEMBLY STRATEGY (2025 - Unlimited Length):

This report is generated section-by-section using progressive file assembly. Each section is generated to APPROPRIATE depth (however many words needed) and written to file immediately using Write/Edit tools.

WHY: Manages output token limits while maintaining quality throughout RESULT: Large reports (up to 20,000 words per skill run) - sections sized naturally by content

CLAUDE CODE LIMIT: 32,000 output tokens (≈20,000 words max per run) For reports >20,000 words: Run skill multiple times for different parts

GENERATION WORKFLOW:

Generate Executive Summary → Write to file

(As long as needed for comprehensive summary)

Generate Introduction → Edit/append to file

(As long as needed to establish context)

Generate Finding 1 → Edit/append to file

(As long as needed to fully present evidence and analysis)

Generate Finding 2 → Edit/append to file

(Each finding sized appropriately - some may need 300 words, others 1,500)

Continue for ALL findings (no limit on number OR length per finding!)

Generate Synthesis → Edit/append to file

(As long as needed for deep synthesis)

Generate Limitations → Edit/append to file
Generate Recommendations → Edit/append to file
Generate Bibliography (ALL citations) → Edit/append to file
Generate Methodology → Edit/append to file

SIZING PRINCIPLE:

Each section should be as long as IT NEEDS TO BE
Simple finding? Maybe 400 words is enough
Complex multi-faceted finding? Could be 1,200 words
Let evidence and analysis determine length, not arbitrary targets
Only constraint: Keep each INDIVIDUAL generation under ~2,000 words to avoid output limits
If a section needs >2,000 words, break it into subsections and generate progressively

CITATION TRACKING (CRITICAL):

Maintain running list in working memory: citations_used = [1, 2, 3, ...]
After each section: Add new citations to list
In Bibliography: Generate entry for EVERY citation in final list
NO gaps, NO ranges, NO placeholders

============================================================================= -->

Executive Summary

[Write 3-5 bullet points, 200-400 words total]

Key Finding 1: [Major discovery with specific data/metrics]
Key Finding 2: [Important insight with evidence]
Key Finding 3: [Critical conclusion with implications]
[Additional findings as needed]

Primary Recommendation: [One clear sentence stating the main recommendation]

Confidence Level: [High/Medium/Low with brief justification]

Introduction

Research Question

[State the original question clearly and completely]

[Add 1-2 sentences providing context for why this question matters]

Scope & Methodology

[2-3 paragraphs explaining:]

What specific aspects were investigated
What was included vs excluded from scope
What research methods were used (web search, academic sources, industry reports, etc.)
How many sources were consulted
Time period covered

Key Assumptions

[List 3-5 important assumptions made during research]

Assumption 1: [Description and why it matters]
Assumption 2: [Description and why it matters]
[Continue...]

Main Analysis

Finding 1: [Descriptive Title That Captures the Key Point]

[Opening paragraph: State the finding clearly and why it matters]

[Body paragraphs:

Present detailed evidence
Include specific data, statistics, dates, numbers
Explain mechanisms, causes, or relationships
Discuss implications
Address nuances or exceptions

]

Key Evidence:

Data point 1 from Source A [1]
Data point 2 from Source B [2]
Conflicting view from Source C [3] and how it was resolved

Implications: [1-2 paragraphs on what this finding means for the user's decision/understanding]

Sources: [1], [2], [3], [4]

Finding 2: [Descriptive Title]

[Follow same detailed structure as Finding 1] [Minimum 300 words per finding] [Include multiple paragraphs with evidence]

Sources: [5], [6], [7], [8]

Finding 3: [Descriptive Title]

[Continue with same detail level]

Sources: [9], [10], [11]

Finding 4: [Descriptive Title]

[And so on... Include 4-8 major findings minimum]

Sources: [12], [13], [14]

[Continue with additional findings as needed]

Synthesis & Insights

Patterns Identified

[2-3 paragraphs identifying key patterns across findings]

Pattern 1: [Name] [Explain the pattern in detail, cite which findings support it]

Pattern 2: [Name] [Continue...]

Novel Insights

[2-3 paragraphs of insights that go BEYOND what sources explicitly stated]

Insight 1: [Name] [What you discovered by connecting information across sources] [Why this matters even though no single source said it explicitly]

Insight 2: [Name] [Continue...]

Implications

[2-3 paragraphs on what all this means]

For [User Context]: [Specific implications for the user's situation/decision]

Broader Implications: [Wider significance of these findings]

Second-Order Effects: [What might happen as consequences of these findings]

Limitations & Caveats

Counterevidence Register

[2-3 paragraphs explaining contradictory evidence found during research]

Contradictory Finding 1: [Description]

Source: [Citation]
Why it contradicts: [Explanation]
How resolved/interpreted: [Your analysis]
Impact on conclusions: [Minimal/Moderate/Significant]

Contradictory Finding 2: [Continue...]

Known Gaps

[2-3 paragraphs explaining:]

What information was not available
What questions remain unanswered
What would strengthen this research

Gap 1: [Description]

Why it's missing
How it affects conclusions
How to address it in future research

Gap 2: [Continue...]

Assumptions

[Revisit key assumptions from intro, now with more detail on their validity]

Assumption 1: [Restate]

Evidence supporting it: [...]
Evidence challenging it: [...]
Overall validity: [...]

Areas of Uncertainty

[2-3 paragraphs on:]

Where sources disagree
Where evidence is thin
Where extrapolation was necessary
What could change conclusions

Uncertainty 1: [Topic] [Detailed explanation of what's uncertain and why]

Uncertainty 2: [Continue...]

Recommendations

Immediate Actions

[3-5 specific actions the user should take NOW]

[Action Title]

What: [Specific action]
Why: [Rationale based on findings]
How: [Implementation steps]
Timeline: [When to do this]

[Continue with similar detail...]

Next Steps

[3-5 actions for the near-term future (1-3 months)]

[Step Title]

[Similar detailed structure]

Further Research Needs

[3-5 areas where additional research would be valuable]

[Research Topic]

What to investigate: [Specific question]
Why it matters: [Connection to current findings]
Suggested approach: [How to research it]

Bibliography

[1] Author Name or Organization ([YEAR]). "Full Title of Article or Paper". Publication Name or Website. https://full-url.com (Retrieved: [CURRENT_DATE])

[2] Second Author ([YEAR]). "Second Article Title". Journal Name, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi-or-url.com (Retrieved: [CURRENT_DATE])

Appendix: Methodology

Research Process

[2-3 paragraphs describing the research process in detail]

Phase Execution:

Phase 1 (SCOPE): [What was done]
Phase 2 (PLAN): [What was done]
Phase 3 (RETRIEVE): [What was done]
[Continue for all phases executed]

Sources Consulted

Total Sources: [Number]

Source Types:

Academic journals: [Number]
Industry reports: [Number]
News articles: [Number]
Government/regulatory: [Number]
Documentation: [Number]
[Other categories]

Geographic Coverage: [If relevant, note geographic distribution of sources]

Temporal Coverage: [Date range of sources, recency distribution]

Verification Approach

[2-3 paragraphs explaining:]

Triangulation:

How claims were verified across multiple sources
Minimum sources required per major claim: 3
How contradictions were handled

Credibility Assessment:

How source quality was evaluated
Scoring system used (0-100)
Average credibility score: [Number]/100
Distribution: [High/medium/low source counts]

Quality Control:

Validation checks performed
Issues found and corrected
Final quality metrics

Claims-Evidence Table

Claim ID	Major Claim	Evidence Type	Supporting Sources	Confidence
C1	[First major claim from findings]	[Primary data / Meta-analysis / Expert opinion]	[1], [2], [3]	High / Medium / Low
C2	[Second major claim]	[Evidence type]	[4], [5], [6]	High / Medium / Low
C3	[Third major claim]	[Evidence type]	[7], [8]	High / Medium / Low
...	[Continue for all major claims]	...	...	...

Confidence Levels:

High: 3+ independent sources, consistent findings, strong methodology
Medium: 2 sources OR single high-quality source with minor contradictions
Low: Single source OR significant contradictions in evidence

Report Metadata

Research Mode: [Quick/Standard/Deep/UltraDeep] Total Sources: [Number] Word Count: [Approximate count] Research Duration: [Time taken] Generated: [Date and time] Validation Status: [Passed with X warnings / Passed without warnings]

Preparing the source view

Deep Research

templates/report_template.md

Research Report: [Topic]

Executive Summary

Introduction

Research Question

Scope & Methodology

Key Assumptions

Main Analysis

Finding 1: [Descriptive Title That Captures the Key Point]

Finding 2: [Descriptive Title]

Finding 3: [Descriptive Title]

Finding 4: [Descriptive Title]

Synthesis & Insights

Patterns Identified

Novel Insights

Implications

Limitations & Caveats

Counterevidence Register

Known Gaps

Assumptions

Areas of Uncertainty

Recommendations

Immediate Actions

Next Steps

Further Research Needs

Bibliography

Appendix: Methodology

Research Process

Sources Consulted

Verification Approach

Claims-Evidence Table

Report Metadata