Skip to content
Back to skills

Gsd Research Phase

ASecurity

Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use $gsd-plan-phase instead)

  • 91 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added June 2, 2026
ai-agentsgobashnode

Works with

  • claude code

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned June 2, 2026

npx -y skills add kursku/skills --skill gsd-research-phase --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Gsd Research Phase?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Gsd Research Phase
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/kursku-gsd-research-phase/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/kursku-gsd-research-phase)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: "gsd-research-phase"
description: "Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use $gsd-plan-phase instead)"
metadata:
  short-description: "Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use $gsd-plan-phase instead)"
risk: safe
---

<codex_skill_adapter>
## A. Skill Invocation
- This skill is invoked by mentioning `$gsd-research-phase`.
- Treat all user text after `$gsd-research-phase` as `{{GSD_ARGS}}`.
- If no arguments are present, treat `{{GSD_ARGS}}` as empty.

## B. AskUserQuestion → request_user_input Mapping
GSD workflows use `AskUserQuestion` (Claude Code syntax). Translate to Codex `request_user_input`:

Parameter mapping:
- `header` → `header`
- `question` → `question`
- Options formatted as `"Label" — description` → `{label: "Label", description: "description"}`
- Generate `id` from header: lowercase, replace spaces with underscores

Batched calls:
- `AskUserQuestion([q1, q2])` → single `request_user_input` with multiple entries in `questions[]`

Multi-select workaround:
- Codex has no `multiSelect`. Use sequential single-selects, or present a numbered freeform list asking the user to enter comma-separated numbers.

Execute mode fallback:
- When `request_user_input` is rejected (Execute mode), present a plain-text numbered list and pick a reasonable default.

## C. Task() → spawn_agent Mapping
GSD workflows use `Task(...)` (Claude Code syntax). Translate to Codex collaboration tools:

Direct mapping:
- `Task(subagent_type="X", prompt="Y")` → `spawn_agent(agent_type="X", message="Y")`
- `Task(model="...")` → omit (Codex uses per-role config, not inline model selection)
- `fork_context: false` by default — GSD agents load their own context via `<files_to_read>` blocks

Parallel fan-out:
- Spawn multiple agents → collect agent IDs → `wait(ids)` for all to complete

Result parsing:
- Look for structured markers in agent output: `CHECKPOINT`, `PLAN COMPLETE`, `SUMMARY`, etc.
- `close_agent(id)` after collecting results from each agent
</codex_skill_adapter>

<objective>
Research how to implement a phase. Spawns gsd-phase-researcher agent with phase context.

**Note:** This is a standalone research command. For most workflows, use `$gsd-plan-phase` which integrates research automatically.

**Use this command when:**
- You want to research without planning yet
- You want to re-research after planning is complete
- You need to investigate before deciding if a phase is feasible

**Orchestrator role:** Parse phase, validate against roadmap, check existing research, gather context, spawn researcher agent, present results.

**Why subagent:** Research burns context fast (WebSearch, Context7 queries, source verification). Fresh 200k context for investigation. Main context stays lean for user interaction.
</objective>

<context>
Phase number: {{GSD_ARGS}} (required)

Normalize phase input in step 1 before any directory lookups.
</context>

<process>

## 0. Initialize Context

```bash
INIT=$(node "$HOME/.codex/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" init phase-op "{{GSD_ARGS}}")
if [[ "$INIT" == @file:* ]]; then INIT=$(cat "${INIT#@file:}"); fi
```

Extract from init JSON: `phase_dir`, `phase_number`, `phase_name`, `phase_found`, `commit_docs`, `has_research`, `state_path`, `requirements_path`, `context_path`, `research_path`.

Resolve researcher model:
```bash
RESEARCHER_MODEL=$(node "$HOME/.codex/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" resolve-model gsd-phase-researcher --raw)
```

## 1. Validate Phase

```bash
PHASE_INFO=$(node "$HOME/.codex/get-shit-done/bin/gsd-tools.cjs" roadmap get-phase "${phase_number}")
```

**If `found` is false:** Error and exit. **If `found` is true:** Extract `phase_number`, `phase_name`, `goal` from JSON.

## 2. Check Existing Research

```bash
ls .planning/phases/${PHASE}-*/RESEARCH.md 2>/dev/null
```

**If exists:** Offer: 1) Update research, 2) View existing, 3) Skip. Wait for response.

**If doesn't exist:** Continue.

## 3. Gather Phase Context

Use paths from INIT (do not inline file contents in orchestrator context):
- `requirements_path`
- `context_path`
- `state_path`

Present summary with phase description and what files the researcher will load.

## 4. Spawn gsd-phase-researcher Agent

Research modes: ecosystem (default), feasibility, implementation, comparison.

```markdown
<research_type>
Phase Research — investigating HOW to implement a specific phase well.
</research_type>

<key_insight>
The question is NOT "which library should I use?"

The question is: "What do I not know that I don't know?"

For this phase, discover:
- What's the established architecture pattern?
- What libraries form the standard stack?
- What problems do people commonly hit?
- What's SOTA vs what Claude's training thinks is SOTA?
- What should NOT be hand-rolled?
</key_insight>

<objective>
Research implementation approach for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
Mode: ecosystem
</objective>

<files_to_read>
- {requirements_path} (Requirements)
- {context_path} (Phase context from discuss-phase, if exists)
- {state_path} (Prior project decisions and blockers)
</files_to_read>

<additional_context>
**Phase description:** {phase_description}
</additional_context>

<downstream_consumer>
Your RESEARCH.md will be loaded by `$gsd-plan-phase` which uses specific sections:
- `## Standard Stack` → Plans use these libraries
- `## Architecture Patterns` → Task structure follows these
- `## Don't Hand-Roll` → Tasks NEVER build custom solutions for listed problems
- `## Common Pitfalls` → Verification steps check for these
- `## Code Examples` → Task actions reference these patterns

Be prescriptive, not exploratory. "Use X" not "Consider X or Y."
</downstream_consumer>

<quality_gate>
Before declaring complete, verify:
- [ ] All domains investigated (not just some)
- [ ] Negative claims verified with official docs
- [ ] Multiple sources for critical claims
- [ ] Confidence levels assigned honestly
- [ ] Section names match what plan-phase expects
</quality_gate>

<output>
Write to: .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md
</output>
```

```
Task(
  prompt=filled_prompt,
  subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
  model="{researcher_model}",
  description="Research Phase {phase}"
)
```

## 5. Handle Agent Return

**`## RESEARCH COMPLETE`:** Display summary, offer: Plan phase, Dig deeper, Review full, Done.

**`## CHECKPOINT REACHED`:** Present to user, get response, spawn continuation.

**`## RESEARCH INCONCLUSIVE`:** Show what was attempted, offer: Add context, Try different mode, Manual.

## 6. Spawn Continuation Agent

```markdown
<objective>
Continue research for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
</objective>

<prior_state>
<files_to_read>
- .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md (Existing research)
</files_to_read>
</prior_state>

<checkpoint_response>
**Type:** {checkpoint_type}
**Response:** {user_response}
</checkpoint_response>
```

```
Task(
  prompt=continuation_prompt,
  subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
  model="{researcher_model}",
  description="Continue research Phase {phase}"
)
```

</process>

<success_criteria>
- [ ] Phase validated against roadmap
- [ ] Existing research checked
- [ ] gsd-phase-researcher spawned with context
- [ ] Checkpoints handled correctly
- [ ] User knows next steps
</success_criteria>

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.