# Research Scoping > A fast single-pass scoping map of a MEL/SRHR question: which perspectives it demands, where those perspectives conflict, and whether it is worth a full orchestration, ending in a triage verdict, never citations or findings. Use when Ane wants a question, proposal angle, learning question, or evaluation framing scoped or triaged before committing tokens to a full run. Not an interview of Ane (/grill-mel), not the deliverable or any sourced evidence (/ann, /researcher, /evidence-synthesis), and not a multi-agent debate (/decision-debate). - Skill: `gasserane/research-scoping` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add gasserane/research-scoping` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/gasserane/research-scoping/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - Author: gasserane (https://skillmd.com/u/gasserane) - Updated: 2026-09-09 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/gasserane/research-scoping --- # Research Scoping A single-context triage pass that maps a question before you decide to spend real tokens on it. It runs the multi-perspective move from Stanford's STORM method compressed into one prompt: discover the perspectives the question demands, surface where they fight, sketch how a full answer would be structured, then say whether to handle it inline or escalate. It retrieves nothing and cites nothing. The output is a map and a plan, framed as questions to pursue, not answers. The value is economic and analytical at once. A full COMPLEX /ann run costs hundreds of thousands of tokens; this pass costs a fraction of that in one context with no subagent fan-out. So it either saves you the big run, or sharpens the roster so the big run is better aimed. ## Lane — when this skill, not another - **research-scoping** (this): map a question's perspectives and tensions in one cheap pass, then triage. No retrieval, no citations, no subagents, no deliverable. - **/grill-mel**: interview Ane one question at a time to sharpen a design she already holds. research-scoping runs the opposite direction, handing Ane a map without interviewing her. - **/ann**: full orchestration that produces the deliverable. research-scoping is the front door you walk through before deciding to open it. - **/researcher, /evidence-synthesis**: retrieve and cite real sources. research-scoping never does; it hands off to these when the question needs evidence. - **/decision-debate**: token-heavy multi-agent debate on one contested decision. research-scoping is single-context and spawns nothing. If the question clearly warrants the deliverable, skip scoping and go straight to /ann or the right builder. ## The honest-by-construction rule This skill must never print a citation or assert a fact about IPPF, an MA, a partner, a contact, a figure, or a date. Everything it surfaces is a hypothesis to verify, by design. A fast, un-sourced map that looks authoritative is the failure mode the whole MEL system exists to prevent, so the guardrail is structural, not stylistic: - No `Author (year)` citations. If a framework is relevant, name the analytic move ("test rival explanations") and add it to the claims-to-verify list for the handoff. Do not cite it. - No asserted facts. Where a fact would matter, write `⚠️ to verify: [what]` instead of a value. - Close every output with the banner below, so the reader cannot mistake the map for findings. ## Method — one context, no fan-out Run every step in a single pass. Light context reads (the conversation, a named project file) are fine to understand the question. Do not run a literature search or spawn specialists; that is the handoff's job, and reaching for it means you are in the wrong skill. 1. **Restate the question** in one line, so the scope is explicit and shared. 2. **Discover perspectives.** Derive the 4 to 6 angles the question genuinely demands, not a generic checklist. This is the same move Vi runs at SELECT, but standalone and up front. Name each angle plainly. 3. **Sharpest questions.** For each perspective, the one or two questions it would press hardest. 4. **Tension map.** Where these perspectives most likely disagree. This is the payload: the conflict, not a smoothed summary. One line per live tension. If you cannot find three real tensions, the question is probably SIMPLE. 5. **Shape of a full answer.** A skeleton outline of how the real deliverable would be structured if commissioned. 6. **Triage verdict.** SIMPLE (handle inline now) or COMPLEX (escalate). For COMPLEX, name a seed specialist roster and the claims that would need verifying. For SIMPLE, say what the inline answer would cover. ## Output structure Use this template every time: **Scoping map: [question]** 1. **Question** — one-line restatement. 2. **Perspectives** — the 4 to 6 angles, named. 3. **What each presses on** — the sharpest question per perspective. 4. **Where they conflict** — the tension map, one line per live disagreement. This is the core. 5. **Shape of a full answer** — skeleton outline. 6. **Verdict** — SIMPLE or COMPLEX, the recommended next step, and for COMPLEX a seed roster plus a `⚠️ to verify:` list. End with: > **Scoping map, not findings.** No claim here is sourced. Treat each line as a hypothesis to verify, not an answer. To produce the real thing, hand this map to /ann, /researcher, or /evidence-synthesis. ## Standing rules - **Stay cheap.** One context, no subagents, no retrieval. The moment you reach for a literature search, hand off. - **Recommend, do not survey.** The verdict carries a pick (SIMPLE or COMPLEX) and a named next step, not a menu. - **Voice.** Plain English (Flesch-Kincaid grade 9 to 10), gloss any MEL term on first use, no em-dashes in body prose. Pass the translatability test: would a Romanian, Tunisian, Ethiopian, or Vietnamese English-speaker understand it on first read? - **Three perspectives minimum.** The discovery move forces this. Fewer than three real angles is itself a signal the question is SIMPLE. ## Close Deliver the map, then offer the handoff: > "Map done. Verdict: [SIMPLE / COMPLEX]. Want me to take this to /ann, /researcher, or /evidence-synthesis, or handle it inline if SIMPLE?" Do not start producing the deliverable from inside this skill. The map is the product; the handoff produces the answer.