name: deep-research description: Autonomous multi-step deep research with iterative planning, gap analysis, and self-critique. Use when a topic requires exhaustive exploration beyond quick research — market intelligence, competitive landscapes, literature reviews, or strategic analyses requiring 30-60+ minutes of autonomous investigation. tags: [research, autonomous, multi-agent, deep-analysis]
Platform Note: This skill was designed for multi-agent execution. Perplexity Computer handles orchestration automatically — treat sub-agent instructions as sequential steps to complete thoroughly.
Deep Research
Autonomous multi-step deep research inspired by Google's Gemini Deep Research architecture. Unlike quick-research (parallel breadth-first) or the research workflow (collaborative step-by-step), deep research operates as an autonomous investigator that iteratively plans, searches, reads, reasons about gaps, and self-critiques its findings before producing a comprehensive cited report.
When to Use This Skill
- Exhaustive exploration — topic requires depth, not just breadth
- Market intelligence — competitive landscapes, market sizing, trend analysis
- Literature reviews — academic, technical, or industry research
- Strategic analysis — M&A targets, investment due diligence, technology bets
- Regulatory research — compliance requirements across jurisdictions
- Technology evaluation — deep technical comparison with evidence
- Any research where "good enough" is not enough — when decisions depend on thoroughness
Do NOT Use This Skill When
- You need a quick answer (use web search directly)
- Broad but shallow exploration is sufficient (use
/faos:quick-research) - You want collaborative, guided research with human-in-the-loop (use
/faos:research) - You're exploring your own codebase (use the Explore agent)
How It Differs from Other Research Skills
| Dimension | Quick Research | Research Workflow | Deep Research |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mode | Parallel breadth-first | Collaborative step-by-step | Autonomous depth-first |
| Human involvement | Minimal (scope only) | High (each step) | Minimal (scope + review) |
| Duration | 5-15 min | 30-60 min | 30-90 min |
| Iterations | 1-3 parallel rounds | 6 sequential steps | 3-7 adaptive iterations |
| Gap analysis | Basic (spawn more if needed) | Manual (user guides) | Autonomous (self-directed) |
| Self-critique | None | None | Multi-pass quality review |
| Best for | Comparisons, lists, overviews | Domain/market/technical deep-dives | Exhaustive investigation |
| Output quality | Good, well-cited | Comprehensive, collaborative | Authoritative, self-validated |
Architecture
Phase 1: PLAN Phase 2: INVESTIGATE (iterative) Phase 3: SYNTHESIZE
┌──────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐
│ Understand │ │ ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ │ Merge & Dedup │
│ query │──────▶│ │ Search │───▶│ Read & │ │────▶│ findings │
│ │ │ │ (web + │ │ Extract │ │ │ │
│ Create │ │ │ sources)│ │ insights │ │ │ Self-critique │
│ research │ │ └────┬────┘ └─────┬─────┘ │ │ (multi-pass) │
│ plan │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ▼ ▼ │ │ Generate │
│ Identify │ │ ┌────────────────────────┐ │ │ final report │
│ dimensions │ │ │ Reason about gaps │ │ │ with citations │
│ │ │ │ → refine plan │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ → spawn sub-agents │ │ │ Rate confidence │
│ │ │ │ → iterate or stop │ │ │ per section │
│ │ │ └────────────────────────┘ │ │ │
└──────────────┘ └─────────── repeats 3-7x ────────┘ └──────────────────┘
Core Design Principles (Learned from Gemini Deep Research)
- Iterative planning — the research plan evolves as findings emerge
- Gap-driven investigation — each iteration targets what's missing, not what's known
- Depth over breadth — follow promising threads deep before moving on
- Self-critique before output — multiple review passes catch errors and hallucinations
- Confidence-rated findings — every claim tagged with confidence level
- Source triangulation — critical claims require 2+ independent sources
Execution
Phase 1: Plan (5-10 min)
1.1 Understand the Research Query
Analyze the user's request to extract:
- Core question — what exactly needs answering?
- Decision context — how will results be used? (investment, strategy, build vs buy, etc.)
- Constraints — geographic, temporal, industry, technology scope
- Quality bar — how authoritative do findings need to be?
If the query is ambiguous, use AskUserQuestion to clarify — but limit to 2-3 focused questions. Don't over-clarify; start researching and refine as you learn.
1.2 Create the Research Plan
Produce a structured plan with 4-8 research dimensions:
## Research Plan: [Topic]
**Core Question:** [one sentence]
**Decision Context:** [how results will be used]
**Time Budget:** [estimated duration]
### Dimensions to Investigate
1. [Dimension] — [what to find, why it matters]
2. [Dimension] — [what to find, why it matters]
3. [Dimension] — [what to find, why it matters]
...
### Source Strategy
- Primary: [official sources, research papers, government data]
- Secondary: [industry reports, expert analysis, news]
- Validation: [cross-reference strategy]
### Known Unknowns
- [What we know we don't know yet]
Show the plan to the user and proceed unless they want changes.
Phase 2: Investigate (15-60 min, 3-7 iterations)
Each iteration follows the Search → Read → Reason → Adapt loop:
2.1 Search
Use WebSearch and WebFetch to gather information. Follow these search strategies:
Start wide, then narrow:
Iteration 1: Broad queries — "[topic] overview 2026", "[topic] market size"
Iteration 2: Targeted queries — "[specific company] [topic] strategy", "[regulation] requirements"
Iteration 3+: Gap-filling — "[specific data point] source", "[conflicting claim] evidence"
Search quality rules:
- Always include current year in searches for market/industry data
- Use site-specific searches for authoritative sources:
site:gov,site:edu,site:arxiv.org - Avoid SEO content farms — prefer primary sources over aggregators
- Search in multiple languages if the topic is region-specific
2.2 Read & Extract
For each source found:
- Fetch the full content with WebFetch
- Extract key facts, data points, and quotes
- Record the source URL, title, date, and credibility assessment
- Note any claims that conflict with prior findings
2.3 Spawn Sub-Agents for Parallel Deep-Dives
When a dimension requires substantial investigation, spawn a dedicated sub-agent:
Agent tool call:
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
description: "Research [specific dimension]"
prompt: |
You are a research analyst investigating: [specific dimension]
Context from prior research:
[relevant findings so far]
Your task:
1. Find [specific information needed]
2. Verify claims with 2+ independent sources
3. Note any conflicting information
4. Rate confidence: HIGH (2+ authoritative sources), MEDIUM (1 authoritative),
LOW (indirect/inferred)
Return structured findings with inline citations [Source Title](URL).
Focus areas:
- [specific sub-topic 1]
- [specific sub-topic 2]
- [specific sub-topic 3]
Scaling rules:
- Simple dimensions: investigate directly (no sub-agent)
- Complex dimensions: 1 sub-agent per dimension
- Very complex topics: 2-3 sub-agents per dimension with non-overlapping scope
- Maximum 5 concurrent sub-agents per iteration
2.4 Reason About Gaps
After each iteration, evaluate what's been found vs what's needed:
### Iteration [N] Gap Analysis
**Findings so far:** [summary of what we know]
**Gaps identified:**
- [ ] [Missing data point] — needed for [reason]
- [ ] [Conflicting claims] — need resolution from [source type]
- [ ] [Shallow coverage] — [dimension] needs deeper investigation
**Next iteration focus:** [what to prioritize]
**Stop criteria met?** [Yes/No — why]
2.5 Stop Criteria
Stop iterating when ANY of these conditions are met:
- Sufficient coverage — all dimensions have HIGH or MEDIUM confidence findings
- Diminishing returns — last iteration found <10% new information
- Maximum iterations reached — 7 iterations is the hard limit
- Source saturation — same sources appearing repeatedly across searches
- Time budget exceeded — respect the estimated duration
Phase 3: Synthesize (10-20 min)
3.1 Merge and Deduplicate
- Collect all findings from direct research and sub-agents
- Remove duplicate information (keep the better-sourced version)
- Organize by theme/dimension from the research plan
- Flag any remaining contradictions
3.2 Self-Critique (Multi-Pass Review)
Run 3 critique passes before generating the final report:
Pass 1: Factual Accuracy
- Does every factual claim have a cited source?
- Are data points (numbers, dates, percentages) verified?
- Are there any claims that seem too good/bad to be true?
- Mark unverified claims with [UNVERIFIED]
Pass 2: Completeness
- Does the research answer the core question?
- Are all dimensions from the plan addressed?
- Are there obvious follow-up questions left unanswered?
- Would a domain expert find critical gaps?
Pass 3: Coherence & Bias
- Is the narrative logically structured?
- Are there hidden biases in source selection?
- Are opposing viewpoints fairly represented?
- Is the confidence rating accurate for each section?
3.3 Generate Final Report
Write the report to the configured output path. Use this structure:
# Deep Research Report: [Topic]
**Date:** [date]
**Researcher:** FAOS Deep Research Agent
**Confidence:** [Overall: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
**Sources Consulted:** [N sources]
**Research Duration:** [time spent]
---
## Executive Summary
[3-5 paragraphs capturing the most important findings. Lead with the answer to the
core question. Include key data points. End with strategic implications.]
---
## Table of Contents
[Auto-generated from sections]
---
## 1. [Dimension/Theme]
[Detailed findings with inline citations]
**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
**Key Data Points:**
- [data point] — [source]
- [data point] — [source]
---
## 2. [Dimension/Theme]
...
---
## Key Insights & Implications
[Synthesized conclusions that go beyond individual findings.
What patterns emerge? What are the strategic implications?
What should the reader do with this information?]
---
## Limitations & Caveats
- [Known gaps in the research]
- [Areas where data quality is uncertain]
- [Biases in available sources]
---
## Recommended Follow-Up
- [ ] [Specific follow-up investigation if needed]
- [ ] [Expert consultation recommended for X]
- [ ] [Data that should be verified with primary sources]
---
## Sources
[1] [Source Title](URL) — [date accessed, credibility note]
[2] [Source Title](URL) — [date accessed, credibility note]
...
Configuration
Paths
installed_path={project-root}/.faos/custom/skills/tools/deep-researchreferences_path={installed_path}/referencesdefault_output_file={output_folder}/analysis/research/deep-research-{topic}-{date}.md
Defaults
| Setting | Default | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Max iterations | 7 | 3-10 |
| Max sub-agents per iteration | 5 | 1-10 |
| Max total sub-agents | 15 | 5-30 |
| Self-critique passes | 3 | 1-5 |
| Confidence threshold to stop | MEDIUM on all dimensions | — |
| Report length | Unlimited (as needed) | — |
Hard Limits
- Maximum 7 research iterations (plan + 6 refinements)
- Maximum 15 total sub-agents across all iterations
- Maximum 5 concurrent sub-agents per iteration
- Stop when findings are sufficient — thoroughness, not perfection
- Token awareness — deep research uses ~30-50x more tokens than chat; budget accordingly
Anti-Patterns
- Boiling the ocean — don't research everything; stay focused on the core question
- Ignoring stop criteria — when sources repeat, stop searching
- Trusting single sources — critical claims need triangulation
- Over-relying on AI summaries — verify key data points from primary sources
- Skipping self-critique — the multi-pass review catches real errors
- Reporting uncertain findings as facts — always include confidence levels
References
- Gemini Deep Research Architecture — iterative plan-search-read-reason loop
- Anthropic Multi-Agent Research — orchestrator-worker pattern, token scaling insights
- LangChain Open Deep Research — open-source multi-step research implementation