Preserve reusable investigations. Use when compatibility, framework/library behavior, tradeoffs, rejected options, null results, performance/security/migration evidence, or external-source synthesis should remain citable.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add aibot88/sec_skill_store --skill loom-research --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Loom Research?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/aibot88-loom-research)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: loom-research
description: "Preserve reusable investigations. Use when compatibility, framework/library behavior, tradeoffs, rejected options, null results, performance/security/migration evidence, or external-source synthesis should remain citable."
compatibility: Markdown-native, script-free Loom protocol.
metadata:
skill_kind: owner-layer
owns_layer: research
---
# loom-research
Research owns reusable discovery.
Use it when the work would benefit from not having to rediscover the same reasoning later.
Research may use an optional source-material store at
`.loom/research/artifacts/<research-slug>/` for articles, fetched web pages, PDFs,
papers, repository snapshots, exported notes, model/advisor outputs, or other raw
inputs that helped the investigation. That directory is support material, usually
gitignored, and may be absent. The research record remains primary: it owns the
synthesis, source evaluation, conclusions, limitations, and downstream route.
## What This Skill Owns
- investigations
- option comparisons
- experiments
- spike and sketch conclusions as research variants when discovery should remain
citable
- evidence synthesis
- optional source-material stores under `.loom/research/artifacts/<research-slug>/`
- rejected options and null results worth preserving
- deferred questions that are not yet ready for their own investigation
- conclusions and recommendations grounded in evidence
## Use This Skill When
- the project lacks evidence for a decision
- multiple options need comparison
- an experiment result should remain citable
- a spike or sketch produced conclusions, rejected variants, or null results
that should become reusable research; use optional `loom-spike` or an
equivalent exploration workflow for procedural spike or sketch detail
- a significant implementation discovery should survive beyond the ticket journal
- a rejected option or null result would otherwise have to be rediscovered
- open questions are accumulating and need a durable home before they are ready to be investigated
## Do Not Use This Skill When
- the work is now a behavior contract
- the work is now a rollout strategy
- the work is just live progress tracking
## Good Research Questions
A strong research note answers:
- what was being investigated
- why it mattered
- how it was investigated
- what evidence was gathered
- what conclusions are justified
- what downstream work should do next
- which options, hypotheses, or variants were rejected and why
- what remains uncertain
## Common Rationalizations
- Rationalization: "I already know the answer."
- Reality: Research exists when evidence or tradeoffs matter; record the evidence so future agents do not rediscover it.
- Rationalization: "Rejected options are not worth writing down."
- Reality: Rejections prevent future churn when another agent is tempted by the same path.
- Rationalization: "Generated support analysis is authoritative."
- Reality: Generated output is source material. Research owns synthesis and limits, not imported authority.
- Rationalization: "Open questions mean the research failed."
- Reality: Honest open questions are useful when they are routed or deferred explicitly.
## Red Flags
- conclusions are stronger than the cited evidence
- sources lack provenance or freshness notes when current facts matter
- alternatives are listed but not actually compared
- null results are missing after failed attempts
- recommendations do not name the downstream owner layer
## Verification
- [ ] Sources include enough provenance to recheck material claims.
- [ ] Evidence synthesis separates observation from conclusion.
- [ ] Rejected options and null results say what future agents should avoid.
- [ ] Recommendations are bounded and routed to owner layers.
## Done Means
- another agent could reuse the note without rerunning the whole investigation
- uncertainty is visible
- recommendations are bounded by actual evidence
## Read In This Order
Read immediately for normal research creation or review:
1. `references/research-shape.md` when structuring investigation, rejected
options, null results, conclusions, or recommendations.
2. `references/source-handling.md` when external sources, current facts, or
source quality matter.
3. `templates/research.md` only when creating or substantially reshaping a
research record.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!