Search, extract, and compare high-quality public sources with Exa through SandBase. Use when asked for deep web research, source discovery, current evidence, topic investigation, company research, or citation-ready findings.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add sandbaseai/sandbase-skills --skill exa-deep-search --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Exa Deep Search?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sandbaseai-exa-deep-search)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: exa-deep-search
description: Search, extract, and compare high-quality public sources with Exa through SandBase. Use when asked for deep web research, source discovery, current evidence, topic investigation, company research, or citation-ready findings.
---
# Exa Deep Search
Turn Exa search into a focused, source-backed research brief. This Skill calls the named Exa capabilities in [the SandBase API map](references/sandbase-api-map.md) through the SandBase MCP gateway. In a SandBase Agent, run the capabilities directly. In another compatible agent, require an authorized SandBase connection before starting; never request, print, or store an API key in the research output.
Read [example workflows](references/example-workflows.md) when the user needs a starting prompt or wants to understand the output.
## Operating principles
- Start from the user's research question and decision context, not a generic search.
- Treat Exa results as evidence; treat model-generated synthesis, comparisons, and recommendations as judgment clearly separated from sources.
- Select search depth, time window, domains, and geography deliberately. State any assumption rather than silently defaulting.
- Optimize for source quality, recency, and relevance — not quantity.
- Cite every externally verifiable claim with a result URL and publication date (when available).
- Keep user research goals, company context, and strategy confidential unless sharing is explicitly requested.
## Workflow
### 1. Frame the research question
Collect or infer: the topic or entity, time window, geography, trusted or excluded domains, audience for the deliverable, and how findings will be used. Classify the request as one or more of: landscape scan, deep evidence gathering, competitive intelligence, current news monitoring, or specific-source extraction.
When the research question is broad, propose 2–3 focused sub-queries and confirm scope before spending API calls.
### 2. Select and call SandBase capabilities
Read [the SandBase API map](references/sandbase-api-map.md) before selecting tools. Use the listed `tool_name` through the SandBase gateway:
1. Call `sandbase_describe_tool` for the selected `tool_name` and read its current input schema.
2. Call `sandbase_call_tool` with that exact `tool_name` and only schema-defined arguments.
3. Keep the tool name, query, search parameters, and result metadata with the returned data.
### 3. Search with Exa
Use `exa_search` with parameters matched to the research need:
| Research need | Recommended parameters |
|---|---|
| Current landscape | `topic: "news"`, bounded `start_published_date`/`end_published_date`, `include_highlights: true` |
| Deep evidence | `search_depth: "advanced"`, `include_summary: true`, request full text only for selected sources |
| Trusted sources only | `include_domains` for first-party, academic, or approved publishers |
| Competitive research | `exclude_domains` for the target's own site; separate queries per competitor |
| Validation or quick check | `search_depth: "basic"`, `num_results: 3–5` |
Tips:
- Write queries as natural-language statements of what a good result page would say, not short keyword strings. Exa responds best to semantic queries.
- Use `category` when available (e.g., `"research paper"`, `"company"`, `"news"`) to narrow result types.
- Iterate: refine by entity, product, problem, event, or time period until evidence is sufficient.
- Request `include_highlights: true` to get relevant snippets without extracting full text for every result.
### 4. Extract selected sources
When deeper analysis of specific pages is needed, send selected URLs to `exa_contents`:
- Choose `include_text: true` for full page content when analyzing structure or extracting data.
- Choose `include_highlights: true` with a `highlights_query` to focus extraction on specific aspects.
- Choose `include_summary: true` for concise overviews when reviewing many pages.
- Use `subpages` only for explicit documentation, pricing, or API crawl tasks.
- Use `max_age_hours: 0` only when freshness requires a live crawl; avoid for routine research.
If `exa_contents` is not yet available in the current Gateway, return the Search results and explicitly state that extraction is awaiting capability publication.
### 5. Synthesize findings
- Separate direct observations from interpretation.
- Group findings by theme, entity, or chronology as appropriate for the research question.
- Note disagreements between sources and evidence gaps.
- Propose follow-up queries for unresolved questions.
## Query crafting tips
Good Exa queries describe the content of the ideal result page:
| Poor query | Better query |
|---|---|
| `AI agents` | `How enterprises evaluate AI agent platforms for production deployment` |
| `observability tools` | `Comparison of AI agent observability and tracing solutions 2025` |
| `competitor pricing` | `Pricing page for enterprise AI agent orchestration platform` |
- Add temporal context: "in 2025", "since January", "latest announcement".
- Add specificity: mention the industry, company size, technology stack, or use case.
- Use `exclude_domains` to avoid results you already know about.
## Output
Return a structured research brief:
### Source map
| # | Title | URL | Published | Relevance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... |
### Key findings
Numbered findings, each citing source(s) by number.
### Disagreements and evidence gaps
What sources disagree on, and what questions remain unanswered.
### Suggested next queries
Follow-up Exa queries or alternative research paths.
## Evidence rules
- Cite a result URL for every externally verifiable claim.
- Label a result's publication date as "unavailable" when Exa does not return one.
- Do not treat an Exa summary as a source quote; use it as an aid to select evidence, then cite the original URL.
- Do not call Exa Answer or Exa Agent endpoints. The user's Agent/LLM synthesizes the evidence.
- Do not copy long source passages; paraphrase and cite.
- Mark clearly when a finding is inferred from multiple sources vs. directly stated in one.
## Failure handling
- If SandBase is unavailable or unauthorized, report the failed capability and ask the user to connect or authorize SandBase; do not silently substitute a direct provider API.
- If `exa_search` returns few or no results, try: broader query, different `search_depth`, removed domain filters, or a wider date range. Report if the topic genuinely lacks public coverage.
- If `exa_contents` is unavailable, deliver search results with highlights and explicitly note the extraction gap.
- If results are low-quality or off-topic, refine the query before reporting; explain what was tried.
## Example tasks
- "Find the last 30 days of reliable sources about AI agent observability. Give me a five-source brief with gaps."
- "Research how enterprise teams evaluate AI agents. Prefer company and academic sources; exclude vendor blogs."
- "Compare the public arguments for and against a retrieval architecture. Use advanced search and cite each source."
- "Find recent funding announcements in the AI developer tools space. Only include sources from the last 7 days."
- "Extract the pricing and feature comparison from these three competitor pages: [URLs]."
## Quality gate
Before delivering, verify that:
- Every finding cites at least one source URL.
- Observations are separated from model-generated interpretations.
- The search parameters (depth, dates, domains) match the stated research need.
- Evidence gaps and low-confidence findings are explicitly labeled.
- The deliverable format matches what the user requested.
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!