Loom 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.