Skip to content
Back to skills

Gsd Research Phase

ASecurity

Research implementation approach for phase before planning

  • 666 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added February 8, 2026
documentationbash

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned February 12, 2026

npx -y skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --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/majiayu000-gsd-research-phase/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/majiayu000-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 implementation approach for phase before planning
allowed-tools: Task, Read, Edit, Bash
---

<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: $ARGUMENTS (required)

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

<process>

## 1. Normalize and Validate Phase

```bash
# Normalize phase number (8 → 08, but preserve decimals like 2.1 → 02.1)
if [[ "$ARGUMENTS" =~ ^[0-9]+$ ]]; then
  PHASE=$(printf "%02d" "$ARGUMENTS")
elif [[ "$ARGUMENTS" =~ ^([0-9]+)\.([0-9]+)$ ]]; then
  PHASE=$(printf "%02d.%s" "${BASH_REMATCH[1]}" "${BASH_REMATCH[2]}")
else
  PHASE="$ARGUMENTS"
fi

grep -A5 "Phase ${PHASE}:" .planning/ROADMAP.md 2>/dev/null
```

**If not found:** Error and exit. **If found:** Extract phase number, name, description.

## 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

```bash
grep -A20 "Phase ${PHASE}:" .planning/ROADMAP.md
cat .planning/REQUIREMENTS.md 2>/dev/null
cat .planning/phases/${PHASE}-*/${PHASE}-CONTEXT.md 2>/dev/null
grep -A30 "### Decisions Made" .planning/STATE.md 2>/dev/null
```

Present summary with phase description, requirements, prior decisions.

## 4. Spawn gsd-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>

<context>
**Phase description:** {phase_description}
**Requirements:** {requirements_list}
**Prior decisions:** {decisions_if_any}
**Phase context:** {context_md_content}
</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",
  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>
Research file: @.planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md
</prior_state>

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

```
Task(
  prompt=continuation_prompt,
  subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
  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.