Skip to content
Back to skills

Research Assistant

ASecurity

Structured research methodology for investigating crypto projects, protocols, market trends, and technical concepts with source evaluation and synthesis.

  • 7 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 6 views
  • Added June 7, 2026
researchrustgogitdocumentation

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned June 7, 2026

npx -y skills add nirholas/three-ui --skill research-assistant --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Research Assistant?

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

Security grade badge for Research Assistant
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/nirholas-research-assistant/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/nirholas-research-assistant)

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: research-assistant
description: Structured research methodology for investigating crypto projects, protocols, market trends, and technical concepts with source evaluation and synthesis.
license: MIT
metadata:
  category: general
  difficulty: beginner
  author: sperax-team
  tags: [general, research, methodology, analysis, synthesis]
---

# Research Assistant

## When to use this skill

Use when the user asks about:
- Researching a crypto topic they're unfamiliar with
- Getting a comprehensive overview of a subject
- Comparing multiple options or approaches
- Understanding a complex technical concept
- Preparing a research brief or summary

## Research Methodology

### 1. Scope Definition

Before starting research, clarify:
- **Research question**: What specifically does the user want to know?
- **Depth level**: Surface overview, moderate analysis, or deep dive?
- **Time sensitivity**: Is this about current state or historical context?
- **Decision context**: Is this research supporting an investment, technical, or strategic decision?
- **Output format**: Summary paragraph, comparison table, pros/cons list, or detailed report?

### 2. Source Hierarchy

Prioritize information sources by reliability:

| Tier | Source Type | Trust Level | Examples |
|------|-----------|-------------|---------|
| 1 | On-chain data | Highest | Block explorers, Dune Analytics, DefiLlama |
| 2 | Official documentation | High | Protocol docs, whitepapers, GitHub repos |
| 3 | Audit reports | High | Trail of Bits, OpenZeppelin, Consensys Diligence |
| 4 | Reputable analysis | Medium-High | Messari, Delphi Digital, The Block Research |
| 5 | Community research | Medium | Mirror posts, governance forums, well-known researchers |
| 6 | News outlets | Medium | CoinDesk, The Block, Blockworks |
| 7 | Social media | Low-Medium | Twitter/X threads, Reddit (verify claims independently) |
| 8 | Anonymous claims | Low | Unverified Discord/Telegram messages |

Always cross-reference claims across multiple sources.

### 3. Research Structure

Organize findings into these sections:
- **Executive summary**: 2-3 sentence answer to the research question
- **Background**: Context needed to understand the topic
- **Key findings**: Numbered list of the most important discoveries
- **Analysis**: Deeper examination of findings with supporting data
- **Risks and limitations**: What could go wrong or what is uncertain
- **Conclusion**: Actionable takeaway aligned with the user's decision context

### 4. Critical Evaluation

Apply these filters to all information:
- **Recency**: Is this information current? Crypto moves fast — data from 6 months ago may be outdated
- **Bias check**: Does the source have a financial stake? (investors talking their book, protocol teams promoting their product)
- **Verifiability**: Can the claim be verified on-chain or through independent sources?
- **Completeness**: Is the source presenting a balanced view or cherry-picking data?
- **Consensus**: Do multiple independent sources agree?

### 5. Comparison Framework

When comparing options, use a structured matrix:

| Criterion | Weight | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|-----------|--------|----------|----------|----------|
| [Criterion 1] | High | Score/notes | Score/notes | Score/notes |
| [Criterion 2] | Medium | Score/notes | Score/notes | Score/notes |
| [Criterion 3] | Low | Score/notes | Score/notes | Score/notes |
| **Weighted result** | | **Total** | **Total** | **Total** |

### 6. Knowledge Gaps

Be transparent about limitations:
- Clearly state what information is unavailable or unverifiable
- Distinguish between facts, reasonable inferences, and speculation
- Flag areas where the user should do additional research
- Note when data is stale and may need refreshing

### 7. Output Format

- **Topic**: Research subject
- **Summary**: 2-3 sentence key finding
- **Confidence level**: High / Medium / Low (based on source quality and agreement)
- **Key findings**: Numbered list (3-7 items)
- **Risks/Unknowns**: What could change the conclusion
- **Sources used**: Brief attribution of key data points
- **Recommendation**: Next steps or actionable insight

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.