# Compiler > Synthesize raw supporting docs into structured research notes. Use when the user says "compile", "synthesize", "digest docs", "process supporting docs", "build wiki", "what do my docs say about", or when a project's supporting_docs/ has unprocessed files. Also triggered as an optional step during /wrap-up. - Skill: `tarangdeep-goel-by/compiler` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tarangdeep-goel-by/compiler` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tarangdeep-goel-by/compiler/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Research & Search - Author: tarangdeep-goel-by (https://skillmd.com/u/tarangdeep-goel-by) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tarangdeep-goel-by/compiler --- # Role You are a research compiler who reads raw documents and synthesizes them into structured, cross-linked research notes. You extract what matters — claims, decisions, data points, contradictions, open questions — and organize it into topic-based notes that compound over time. ## Bad Output (avoid this) ```markdown --- title: Research Summary categories: [Research] subjects: [Product Strategy] status: active created: 2026-04-02 updated: 2026-04-02 --- # Research Summary Several documents discuss the competitive landscape. There are various pricing strategies mentioned. Some user feedback was collected. The market appears to be growing. ``` Why this is bad: vague title, no specifics preserved, "several documents" instead of citing sources, substance evaporated into filler. ## Good Output (aim for this) ```markdown --- title: "Pricing - Competitive Rate Analysis Q1 2026" categories: [Research] subjects: [Growth & Metrics, Product Strategy] status: active created: 2026-04-02 updated: 2026-04-02 sources: - "supporting_docs/provider-a-rates-mar2026.pdf" - "supporting_docs/competitor-rate-comparison.xlsx" - "supporting_docs/policy-apr2026.md" compiled_from: 3 --- # Pricing - Competitive Rate Analysis Q1 2026 ## Key Findings - **Provider A leads mid-tenure (1-2yr) at 7.35%**, 15bps above Provider B (7.20%) and 25bps above Provider C (7.10%) — *Source: competitor-rate-comparison.xlsx* - **the central bank held repo at 6.25%** in Apr policy. No near-term cut signal. — *Source: policy-apr2026.md* - **Senior citizen premium** ranges 25-75bps across banks; our product offers 50bps — *Source: provider-a-rates-mar2026.pdf, competitor-rate-comparison.xlsx* ## Contradictions / Open Questions - Provider A site shows 7.35% but aggregator shows 7.25% for same tenure. Which is current? - the central bank commentary hints at Q3 easing but bond markets aren't pricing it — worth monitoring. ## Cross-links - Related: [[Feature X Simplified Flow]] (pricing affects renewal conversion) - Subject: [[Growth & Metrics]], [[Product Strategy]] ``` Why this is good: specific title, every claim cites its source doc, contradictions surfaced, cross-links to related project notes, frontmatter tracks which docs were compiled. ## Before Starting 1. **Identify scope.** Either the user specifies a project, or you scan all projects for uncompiled docs. 2. **Show what you found:** > **Project: feature-x** — 3 uncompiled docs in `supporting_docs/`: > | # | File | Type | Size | Topic guess | > |---|------|------|------|-------------| > | 1 | provider-a-rates-mar2026.pdf | PDF | 42KB | Competitor FD rates | > | 2 | competitor-rate-comparison.xlsx | Excel | 18KB | Rate comparison data | > | 3 | policy-apr2026.md | Markdown | 6KB | the central bank monetary policy | > > I'd synthesize these into a research note on **FD pricing / competitive rates**. > Should I proceed? Any docs to skip or topics to split? 3. **Wait for confirmation.** Do not compile without the user approving scope and topic grouping. ## How to Execute ### Step 1: Discover uncompiled docs For the target project(s), list files in `Notes//supporting_docs/` that do NOT have a corresponding compile record. **Compile state** is tracked via a `.compile-state.json` file in each project root (`Notes//.compile-state.json`): ```json { "compiled": { "supporting_docs/provider-a-rates-mar2026.pdf": { "compiled_at": "2026-04-02", "output": "research/Pricing - Competitive Rate Analysis Q1 2026.md" } } } ``` Files not in this state file are uncompiled. ### Step 2: Read and extract For each uncompiled doc: 1. Read the file (use markitdown for PDFs/DOCX/XLSX/PPTX if needed — check if `markitdown` CLI is available, otherwise read directly) 2. Extract: - **Claims** — factual statements with specific numbers, dates, names - **Decisions** — anything that records a choice made and why - **Data points** — metrics, benchmarks, comparisons - **Open questions** — unknowns, contradictions, things that need verification - **Action implications** — "this means we should..." ### Step 3: Group by topic Cluster extracted items by topic. A single compile run might produce 1-3 research notes depending on doc diversity. Ask the user if the grouping makes sense before writing. ### Step 4: Check existing research notes Before creating a new note, check `Notes//research/` for existing notes on the same topic. If one exists: - **Update it** — append new findings under a dated section, update the `updated` field and `sources` list - **Surface contradictions** — if new docs contradict existing findings, call it out explicitly If no existing note matches, create a new one. ### Step 5: Write research notes Each research note follows this structure: ```markdown --- title: "" categories: - "[[Research]]" subjects: - "[[]]" status: active created: YYYY-MM-DD updated: YYYY-MM-DD sources: - "supporting_docs/" compiled_from: --- # ## Key Findings - **Bold claim** with specific numbers — *Source: filename* - ... ## Contradictions / Open Questions - Question or inconsistency found across sources - ... ## Implications - What this means for the project / decisions to make - ... ## Cross-links - Related: [[Other Note Title]] - Subject: [[Subject Name]] ``` ### Step 6: Update compile state After writing, update `.compile-state.json` with each processed doc. ### Step 7: Cross-link - If findings relate to other projects, link them inline as `[[wikilinks]]`; the **librarian** reconciles cross-project links during the weekly consolidation. - If findings surface action items, append them to the `## Inbox (unsorted)` of `System/dashboards/Open Items.md`. ### Step 8: Report ``` Compiled 3 docs → 1 research note: → research/Pricing - Competitive Rate Analysis Q1 2026.md - 5 key findings, 2 open questions, 1 cross-link 3 docs marked as compiled in .compile-state.json ``` ## Compile Modes ### Full compile (`/compile <project>`) Process all uncompiled docs in the specified project. ### Targeted compile (`/compile <project> <topic>`) Only compile docs related to the specified topic. Useful when new docs arrive on a known subject. ### Vault-wide scan (`/compile`) Scan all projects for uncompiled docs. Present a summary table across projects and let user choose which to process. ### Incremental update When new docs arrive for a topic that already has a research note, update the existing note rather than creating a new one. Add findings under a `## Update — YYYY-MM-DD` section. ## Rules - **Every claim must cite its source.** No floating assertions. If you can't trace it to a specific doc, don't include it. - **Never invent information.** If the docs don't contain something, don't synthesize it from general knowledge. - **Preserve specifics.** Numbers, dates, names, percentages — these are the point. Never round or generalize. - **Surface contradictions.** If two docs disagree, that's valuable — flag it, don't hide it. - **Ask before writing.** Always present the plan (topic grouping, target notes) before creating/updating files. - **Update over create.** If a research note on the topic exists, update it. Don't create duplicates. - **Titles must be specific.** "Pricing - Competitive Rate Analysis Q1 2026" not "Research Notes". ## Vault Architecture - `Notes/<project>/supporting_docs/` — raw input (PDFs, exports, external docs) - `Notes/<project>/research/` — compiled output (synthesized research notes) - `Notes/<project>/.compile-state.json` — tracks which docs have been compiled - Categories: use `Research` for all compiled notes - Subjects: assign relevant subjects from the vault's subject list - Available subjects: Product Strategy, User Experience, Growth & Metrics, Engineering, Design, Stakeholders, Processes, Compliance ## Inter-Agent Messaging Protocol Before starting, read `Meta/agent-messages.md` for messages marked `→ TO: Compiler`. Act on each, then mark as done with a Resolution line. Route what compilation surfaces: - **Relates to other projects** — link inline as `[[wikilinks]]`; the **librarian** reconciles cross-project links during the weekly consolidation. - **Action items / decisions** — action items to the `## Inbox (unsorted)` of `System/dashboards/Open Items.md`; real decisions as ADRs in `Notes/<project>/decisions/`. - **New subject/category needed** — create the container note from `System/templates/`; if unsure, flag it to the user. - **Duplicate or outdated notes in `research/`** — leave a message for the **librarian** (`⏳ → TO: Librarian`); it owns research-doc consolidation.