Research Digest
Generate structured research briefs from RSS feeds, web sources, and industry publications.
Install
git clone https://github.com/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing.git && cp -r claude-marketing/skills/research-digest ~/.claude/skills/
Core Capabilities
- Pull from RSS feeds, web search, and curated sources
- Assess source credibility and recency
- Cross-reference findings across multiple sources
- Extract trends, data points, and expert opinions
- Identify counter-arguments and nuance
- Produce actionable research briefs
Workflow
1. Source Collection
Gather raw material from:
- RSS feeds — industry blogs, news sites, newsletters (via any RSS reader/API)
- Web search — targeted queries for recent coverage
- Industry reports — analyst reports, whitepapers, earnings calls
- Social/community — Reddit, Twitter/X, LinkedIn discussions
2. Source Assessment
Evaluate each source on:
| Criterion |
Weight |
Scale |
| Credibility |
30% |
Original research > analysis > aggregation > opinion |
| Recency |
25% |
Last 7 days > 30 days > 90 days > older |
| Relevance |
25% |
Directly on topic > adjacent > tangential |
| Uniqueness |
20% |
Novel data > unique angle > common knowledge |
3. Synthesis
- Identify convergent themes (3+ sources saying the same thing)
- Flag divergent views (contradictions between sources)
- Extract specific data points with citations
- Note the "so what" — why this matters for the target audience
4. Brief Generation
Produce a structured markdown brief.
Brief Structure
# Research Brief: [Topic]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Depth:** Quick scan / Standard / Deep dive
**Sources reviewed:** [count]
## Executive Summary
- [Key finding 1]
- [Key finding 2]
- [Key finding 3]
## Key Findings
### Finding 1: [Headline]
[2-3 paragraph analysis with source citations]
### Finding 2: [Headline]
[2-3 paragraph analysis with source citations]
## Data Points
| Metric | Value | Source | Date |
|--------|-------|--------|------|
## Expert Perspectives
- "[Quote]" — [Name, Title, Source]
## Counter-Arguments & Nuance
- [Opposing view with source]
## Content Angles
- [Angle 1: how to use this research in content]
- [Angle 2]
## Sources
1. [Source name] — [URL] — [Credibility: High/Medium/Low]
Options
| Option |
Values |
Default |
| Time range |
24h, 7d, 30d, 90d |
7d |
| Depth |
quick, standard, deep |
standard |
| Focus |
topic keyword or category |
required |
| Output |
brief, report, raw-notes |
brief |
Quality Standards
- Minimum 3 independent sources per key finding
- Recency bias toward last 30 days unless historical context is needed
- Always include counter-arguments — at least one contrarian or skeptical view
- Separate facts from opinions — clearly label which is which
- Link to original sources — never cite without attribution
- No speculation — if data is missing, say so rather than guessing
For source credibility framework and synthesis methodology, see REFERENCE.md.
1---2name: research-digest3description: Generate structured research briefs from RSS feeds and web sources on any topic. Synthesizes multiple sources into actionable analysis with key findings, data points, expert perspectives, and content angles.4license: MIT5---67# Research Digest89Generate structured research briefs from RSS feeds, web sources, and industry publications.1011## Install1213```bash14git clone https://github.com/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing.git && cp -r claude-marketing/skills/research-digest ~/.claude/skills/15```1617## Core Capabilities1819- Pull from RSS feeds, web search, and curated sources20- Assess source credibility and recency21- Cross-reference findings across multiple sources22- Extract trends, data points, and expert opinions23- Identify counter-arguments and nuance24- Produce actionable research briefs2526## Workflow2728### 1. Source Collection2930Gather raw material from:31- **RSS feeds** — industry blogs, news sites, newsletters (via any RSS reader/API)32- **Web search** — targeted queries for recent coverage33- **Industry reports** — analyst reports, whitepapers, earnings calls34- **Social/community** — Reddit, Twitter/X, LinkedIn discussions3536### 2. Source Assessment3738Evaluate each source on:3940| Criterion | Weight | Scale |41|-----------|--------|-------|42| Credibility | 30% | Original research > analysis > aggregation > opinion |43| Recency | 25% | Last 7 days > 30 days > 90 days > older |44| Relevance | 25% | Directly on topic > adjacent > tangential |45| Uniqueness | 20% | Novel data > unique angle > common knowledge |4647### 3. Synthesis4849- Identify convergent themes (3+ sources saying the same thing)50- Flag divergent views (contradictions between sources)51- Extract specific data points with citations52- Note the "so what" — why this matters for the target audience5354### 4. Brief Generation5556Produce a structured markdown brief.5758## Brief Structure5960```markdown61# Research Brief: [Topic]62**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD63**Depth:** Quick scan / Standard / Deep dive64**Sources reviewed:** [count]6566## Executive Summary67- [Key finding 1]68- [Key finding 2]69- [Key finding 3]7071## Key Findings7273### Finding 1: [Headline]74[2-3 paragraph analysis with source citations]7576### Finding 2: [Headline]77[2-3 paragraph analysis with source citations]7879## Data Points80| Metric | Value | Source | Date |81|--------|-------|--------|------|8283## Expert Perspectives84- "[Quote]" — [Name, Title, Source]8586## Counter-Arguments & Nuance87- [Opposing view with source]8889## Content Angles90- [Angle 1: how to use this research in content]91- [Angle 2]9293## Sources941. [Source name] — [URL] — [Credibility: High/Medium/Low]95```9697## Options9899| Option | Values | Default |100|--------|--------|---------|101| Time range | 24h, 7d, 30d, 90d | 7d |102| Depth | quick, standard, deep | standard |103| Focus | topic keyword or category | required |104| Output | brief, report, raw-notes | brief |105106## Quality Standards1071081. **Minimum 3 independent sources** per key finding1092. **Recency bias** toward last 30 days unless historical context is needed1103. **Always include counter-arguments** — at least one contrarian or skeptical view1114. **Separate facts from opinions** — clearly label which is which1125. **Link to original sources** — never cite without attribution1136. **No speculation** — if data is missing, say so rather than guessing114115For source credibility framework and synthesis methodology, see [REFERENCE.md](REFERENCE.md).
thatrebeccarae