Knowledge Synthesis

Quick Summary

Goal: Produce a fully-cited, template-compliant research report by synthesizing the evidence base using the enforced template — whose confidence scores and gaps are honest enough to trust for decisions.

Summary:

• Purpose: consolidate an EXISTING evidence base (.claude/tmp/_evidence-{slug}.md + _sources-{slug}.md from deep-research) into one fully-cited report at docs/knowledge/research/{slug}.md — this skill does NOT gather sources, it synthesizes them — why: gathering already happened upstream; re-researching here invents findings.
• Main steps, in order: (1) Load evidence — inventory findings, confidence scores, unresolved discrepancies, remaining gaps; (2) Load template (.claude/templates/research-report-template.md) — every section required; (3) Synthesize — map findings into each section with inline [N] citations + per-finding confidence, note cross-cutting patterns/contradictions in Analysis; (4) Citation audit — zero orphan citations, zero orphan sources; (5) Confidence summary — importance-weighted rollup flagging every <60% finding; then clean up .claude/tmp/ working files.
• Enforced template is non-negotiable — every section MUST appear, Knowledge Gaps NEVER omitted — why: a missing gaps section manufactures false confidence.
• Citation discipline is the core gate — every claim inline [N], every Sources-table row referenced ≥1×, Tier 4 (unverified) NEVER cited as fact, 2+ independent sources per factual claim.
• Synthesize FROM evidence only — NEVER fabricate, add, or upgrade findings beyond gathered evidence — why: invented findings poison the report's trust.

Workflow:

1. Load evidence — Read evidence base from deep-research
2. Load template — Read enforced template from .claude/templates/
3. Synthesize — Write report following template structure
4. Citation check — Verify every claim has citation
5. Confidence summary — Aggregate scores, flag gaps

Key Rules:

• MUST ATTENTION use enforced template structure — all sections required
• Every factual claim inline-cited: [N] referencing source table
• Knowledge gaps section mandatory

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

Knowledge Synthesis

Knowledge Work Rules

Web Research Protocol — Every factual claim needs 2+ independent sources. Source tiers: Tier 1 (authoritative .gov/.edu/official docs), Tier 2 (industry reports), Tier 3 (credible blogs — cross-validate), Tier 4 (unverified — NEVER cite as fact). Declare confidence (95/80/60/<60%) for all findings. Use the enforced template structure — all sections required. Working files → .claude/tmp/, final output → docs/knowledge/. Canonical protocol lives in the web-research skill.

Step 1: Load Evidence

Read .claude/tmp/_evidence-{slug}.md and .claude/tmp/_sources-{slug}.md.

Inventory:

• Total findings with confidence scores
• Unresolved discrepancies
• Remaining gaps

Step 2: Load Template

Read enforced template: .claude/templates/research-report-template.md

Every template section MUST ATTENTION appear in final report.

Step 3: Synthesize Report

Write to docs/knowledge/research/{slug}.md. For each template section:

1. Map relevant findings from evidence base
2. Write content with inline citations [N]
3. Declare confidence per finding
4. Note cross-cutting patterns and contradictions in Analysis section

Step 4: Citation Audit

Verify:

• Every factual claim has 1+ [N] citation
• Every source in Sources table referenced 1+ time
• No orphan citations (referencing non-existent source)

Step 5: Confidence Summary

Calculate overall report confidence:

• Average of all finding confidence scores
• Weight by finding importance
• Flag any <60% findings prominently

Output

Final report: docs/knowledge/research/{descriptive-slug}.md

Clean up working files from .claude/tmp/ after successful synthesis.

[IMPORTANT] Use TaskCreate to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting.

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

Re-read files after context changes. Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting. Verify generated content against source evidence. AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing. Check downstream references before deleting or renaming. Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first. Trace the full impact chain after edits. Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done. Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect. Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing OR flagging one as a defect. Before changing or reporting a constant, limit, flag, cutoff, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history, the CALLER's ordering, and 2+ sibling call sites of the same convention. A doc stating WHAT without WHY is missing rationale, not proof of a missing guard. Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently. Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk. Assert the outcome your system owns, not the intermediate state your infrastructure owns. When verifying async work, assert the final business state — never the delivery/retry bookkeeping held in shared infrastructure that any co-running process can write. Such a check passes when run alone and flakes the moment anything else shares that infrastructure. Keep shared guidance role-relevant. Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols.

Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.

MUST ATTENTION apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (file:line for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence.

MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting.

Project Protocol Overlay — Before executing this skill, resolve any PROJECT overlay rules layered onto it: match this skill's name against the Target column of the project's skill-protocol index (docs/project-reference/skill-protocols-reference.md by default; a referenceDocs entry in docs/project-config.json overrides the path), taking the most specific matching tier ONLY — exact name > glob > *. That precedence orders overlays against EACH OTHER, never against this skill. Read ONLY the matched bodies, resolved as <protocols-dir>/<Name>.md; a row's Body link is display text, never a read path. A matched body that is missing or malformed is REPORTED and skipped — never reconstructed from the index Description. No index, or no match -> proceed with no overlay, silently. Full contract: .claude/skills/project-skill-protocol/references/registry.md.

Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY: they ADD rules on top of this skill's own protocol and NEVER replace, override, disable, or reinterpret a rule it already states — removing every overlay must return this skill to exactly its documented behavior. An overlay is a BRIEF, not an authority escalation: it can NEVER waive a workflow gate, git discipline, a review gate, or a user-confirmation gate. A genuine overlay-vs-skill conflict, or two equally-specific overlays that directly contradict -> surface both to the user; NEVER resolve silently.

MUST ATTENTION resolve project protocol overlays for this skill BEFORE executing — most specific matching tier only (exact > glob > *, which ranks overlays against each other, NEVER against this skill), read only matched bodies at <protocols-dir>/<Name>.md; a missing or malformed body is reported, never reconstructed. Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY (they never replace this skill's own rules) and are a brief, NEVER an authority escalation; an equal-specificity contradiction goes to the user.

Closing Reminders

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal: Produce a fully-cited, template-compliant research report by synthesizing the existing evidence base through the enforced template — whose confidence scores and Knowledge Gaps are honest enough to trust for decisions.

Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries): MUST ATTENTION honor every block below — each is a signpost to its canonical body above.

• AI Mistake Prevention: verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity.
• Critical Thinking: traced proof per claim, confidence >80% to act, never guess as fact.

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION use enforced template structure (.claude/templates/research-report-template.md) — every section required, NEVER omit Knowledge Gaps — why: a missing gaps section manufactures false confidence in incomplete research IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION inline-cite every factual claim with [N]; verify zero orphan citations (claim cites missing source) AND zero orphan sources (Sources-table row referenced 0 times) — why: uncited claims are assertions, not findings IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION synthesize FROM the evidence base only (.claude/tmp/_evidence-{slug}.md + _sources-{slug}.md) — NEVER fabricate, add, or upgrade findings beyond gathered evidence; this skill consolidates, it does not research — why: invented findings poison the report's trust IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION respect source tiers — Tier 4 (unverified) NEVER cited as fact; every factual claim backed by 2+ independent sources — why: single-source or unverified claims read as confident but unproven IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION close with an honest confidence rollup (importance-weighted average of finding scores) that prominently flags every <60% finding — why: an unflagged weak finding inflates apparent report confidence **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting; mark one in_progress at a time and complete it on evidence **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** cite file:line evidence (or [N] source) for every claim — confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT assert; NEVER present a guess as fact IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION grep/read 3+ similar existing reports under docs/knowledge/research/ before writing — match the template's section shape, do NOT invent a new layout — why: divergent report structure breaks the knowledge-review gate IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION output final report to docs/knowledge/research/{slug}.md, then clean up .claude/tmp/ working files after successful synthesis — why: stale working files leak across runs IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality (template complete · citations balanced · gaps present · rollup flagged)

Anti-Rationalization:

IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal echo: fully-cited, template-compliant report; NEVER omit Knowledge Gaps; zero orphan citations/sources — synthesize FROM evidence, never fabricate.