Resumo de Pesquisa
Resumo em PT-BR: Sintetiza entrevistas, estudos e achados de pesquisa em insights acionaveis.
Titulo original: Research Summarizer
Observacao: instrucoes detalhadas, referencias e scripts originais abaixo foram preservados em ingles.
Read less. Understand more. Cite correctly.
Structured research summarization workflow that turns dense source material into actionable briefs. Built for product managers, analysts, founders, and anyone who reads more than they should have to.
Not a generic "summarize this" — a repeatable framework that extracts what matters, compares across sources, and formats citations properly.
Slash Commands
| Command |
What it does |
/research:summarize |
Summarize a single source into a structured brief |
/research:compare |
Compare 2-5 sources side-by-side with synthesis |
/research:cite |
Extract and format all citations from a document |
When This Skill Activates
Recognize these patterns from the user:
- "Summarize this paper / article / report"
- "What are the key findings in this document?"
- "Compare these sources"
- "Extract citations from this PDF"
- "Give me a research brief on [topic]"
- "Break down this whitepaper"
- Any request involving: summarize, research brief, literature review, citation, source comparison
If the user has a document and wants structured understanding → this skill applies.
Workflow
/research:summarize — Single Source Summary
Identify source type
- Academic paper → use IMRAD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, Analysis, Discussion)
- Web article → use claim-evidence-implication structure
- Technical report → use executive summary structure
- Documentation → use reference summary structure
Extract structured brief
Title: [exact title]
Author(s): [names]
Date: [publication date]
Source Type: [paper | article | report | documentation]
## Key Thesis
[1-2 sentences: the central argument or finding]
## Key Findings
1. [Finding with supporting evidence]
2. [Finding with supporting evidence]
3. [Finding with supporting evidence]
## Methodology
[How they arrived at these findings — data sources, sample size, approach]
## Limitations
- [What the source doesn't cover or gets wrong]
## Actionable Takeaways
- [What to do with this information]
## Notable Quotes
> "[Direct quote]" (p. X)
Assess quality
- Source credibility (peer-reviewed, reputable outlet, primary vs secondary)
- Evidence strength (data-backed, anecdotal, theoretical)
- Recency (when published, still relevant?)
- Bias indicators (funding source, author affiliation, methodology gaps)
/research:compare — Multi-Source Comparison
Collect sources (2-5 documents)
Summarize each using the single-source workflow above
Build comparison matrix
| Dimension | Source A | Source B | Source C |
|------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------|
| Central Thesis | ... | ... | ... |
| Methodology | ... | ... | ... |
| Key Finding | ... | ... | ... |
| Sample/Scope | ... | ... | ... |
| Credibility | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low |
Synthesize
- Where do sources agree? (convergent findings = stronger signal)
- Where do they disagree? (divergent findings = needs investigation)
- What gaps exist across all sources?
- What's the weight of evidence for each position?
Produce synthesis brief
## Consensus Findings
[What most sources agree on]
## Contested Points
[Where sources disagree, with strongest evidence for each side]
## Gaps
[What none of the sources address]
## Recommendation
[Based on weight of evidence, what should the reader believe/do?]
/research:cite — Citation Extraction
- Scan document for all references, footnotes, in-text citations
- Extract and format using the requested style (APA 7 default)
- Classify citations by type:
- Primary sources (original research, data)
- Secondary sources (reviews, meta-analyses, commentary)
- Tertiary sources (textbooks, encyclopedias)
- Output sorted bibliography with classification tags
Supported citation formats:
- APA 7 (default) — social sciences, business
- IEEE — engineering, computer science
- Chicago — humanities, history
- Harvard — general academic
- MLA 9 — arts, humanities
Tooling
scripts/extract_citations.py
CLI utility for extracting and formatting citations from text.
Features:
- Regex-based citation detection (DOI, URL, author-year, numbered references)
- Multiple output formats (APA, IEEE, Chicago, Harvard, MLA)
- JSON export for integration with reference managers
- Deduplication of repeated citations
Usage:
# Extract citations from a file (APA format, default)
python3 scripts/extract_citations.py document.txt
# Specify format
python3 scripts/extract_citations.py document.txt --format ieee
# JSON output
python3 scripts/extract_citations.py document.txt --format apa --output json
# From stdin
cat paper.txt | python3 scripts/extract_citations.py --stdin
scripts/format_summary.py
CLI utility for generating structured research summaries.
Features:
- Multiple summary templates (academic, article, report, executive)
- Configurable output length (brief, standard, detailed)
- Markdown and plain text output
- Key findings extraction with evidence tagging
Usage:
# Generate structured summary template
python3 scripts/format_summary.py --template academic
# Brief executive summary format
python3 scripts/format_summary.py --template executive --length brief
# All templates listed
python3 scripts/format_summary.py --list-templates
# JSON output
python3 scripts/format_summary.py --template article --output json
Quality Assessment Framework
Rate every source on four dimensions:
| Dimension |
High |
Medium |
Low |
| Credibility |
Peer-reviewed, established author |
Reputable outlet, known author |
Blog, unknown author, no review |
| Evidence |
Large sample, rigorous method |
Moderate data, sound approach |
Anecdotal, no data, opinion |
| Recency |
Published within 2 years |
2-5 years old |
5+ years, may be outdated |
| Objectivity |
No conflicts, balanced view |
Minor affiliations disclosed |
Funded by interested party, one-sided |
Overall Rating:
- 4 Highs = Strong source — cite with confidence
- 2+ Mediums = Adequate source — cite with caveats
- 2+ Lows = Weak source — verify independently before citing
Summary Templates
See references/summary-templates.md for:
- Academic paper summary template (IMRAD)
- Web article summary template (claim-evidence-implication)
- Technical report template (executive summary)
- Comparative analysis template (matrix + synthesis)
- Literature review template (thematic organization)
See references/citation-formats.md for:
- APA 7 formatting rules and examples
- IEEE formatting rules and examples
- Chicago, Harvard, MLA quick reference
Proactive Triggers
Flag these without being asked:
- Source has no date → Note it. Undated sources lose credibility points.
- Source contradicts other sources → Highlight the contradiction explicitly. Don't paper over disagreements.
- Source is behind a paywall → Note limited access. Suggest alternatives if known.
- User provides only one source for a compare → Ask for at least one more. Comparison needs 2+.
- Citations are incomplete → Flag missing fields (year, author, title). Don't invent metadata.
- Source is 5+ years old in a fast-moving field → Warn about potential obsolescence.
Installation
One-liner (any tool)
git clone https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills.git
cp -r claude-skills/produto/resumo-de-pesquisa ~/.claude/skills/
Multi-tool install
./scripts/convert.sh --skill resumo-de-pesquisa --tool codex|gemini|cursor|windsurf|openclaw
OpenClaw
clawhub install cs-resumo-de-pesquisa
Related Skills
- analytics-de-produto — Quantitative analysis. Complementary — use resumo-de-pesquisa for qualitative sources, analytics-de-produto for metrics.
- teardown-competitivo — Competitive research. Complementary — use resumo-de-pesquisa for individual source analysis, teardown-competitivo for market landscape.
- content-production — Content writing. Research-summarizer feeds content-production — summarize sources first, then write.
- descoberta-de-produto — Discovery frameworks. Complementary — resumo-de-pesquisa for desk research, descoberta-de-produto for user research.
1---2name: resumo-de-pesquisa3description: Sintetiza entrevistas, estudos e achados de pesquisa em insights acionaveis.4license: MIT5---67# Resumo de Pesquisa89Resumo em PT-BR: Sintetiza entrevistas, estudos e achados de pesquisa em insights acionaveis.10Titulo original: `Research Summarizer`11Observacao: instrucoes detalhadas, referencias e scripts originais abaixo foram preservados em ingles.121314> Read less. Understand more. Cite correctly.1516Structured research summarization workflow that turns dense source material into actionable briefs. Built for product managers, analysts, founders, and anyone who reads more than they should have to.1718Not a generic "summarize this" — a repeatable framework that extracts what matters, compares across sources, and formats citations properly.1920---2122## Slash Commands2324| Command | What it does |25|---------|-------------|26| `/research:summarize` | Summarize a single source into a structured brief |27| `/research:compare` | Compare 2-5 sources side-by-side with synthesis |28| `/research:cite` | Extract and format all citations from a document |2930---3132## When This Skill Activates3334Recognize these patterns from the user:3536- "Summarize this paper / article / report"37- "What are the key findings in this document?"38- "Compare these sources"39- "Extract citations from this PDF"40- "Give me a research brief on [topic]"41- "Break down this whitepaper"42- Any request involving: summarize, research brief, literature review, citation, source comparison4344If the user has a document and wants structured understanding → this skill applies.4546---4748## Workflow4950### `/research:summarize` — Single Source Summary51521. **Identify source type**53 - Academic paper → use IMRAD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, Analysis, Discussion)54 - Web article → use claim-evidence-implication structure55 - Technical report → use executive summary structure56 - Documentation → use reference summary structure57582. **Extract structured brief**59 ```60 Title: [exact title]61 Author(s): [names]62 Date: [publication date]63 Source Type: [paper | article | report | documentation]6465 ## Key Thesis66 [1-2 sentences: the central argument or finding]6768 ## Key Findings69 1. [Finding with supporting evidence]70 2. [Finding with supporting evidence]71 3. [Finding with supporting evidence]7273 ## Methodology74 [How they arrived at these findings — data sources, sample size, approach]7576 ## Limitations77 - [What the source doesn't cover or gets wrong]7879 ## Actionable Takeaways80 - [What to do with this information]8182 ## Notable Quotes83 > "[Direct quote]" (p. X)84 ```85863. **Assess quality**87 - Source credibility (peer-reviewed, reputable outlet, primary vs secondary)88 - Evidence strength (data-backed, anecdotal, theoretical)89 - Recency (when published, still relevant?)90 - Bias indicators (funding source, author affiliation, methodology gaps)9192### `/research:compare` — Multi-Source Comparison93941. **Collect sources** (2-5 documents)952. **Summarize each** using the single-source workflow above963. **Build comparison matrix**9798 ```99 | Dimension | Source A | Source B | Source C |100 |------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------|101 | Central Thesis | ... | ... | ... |102 | Methodology | ... | ... | ... |103 | Key Finding | ... | ... | ... |104 | Sample/Scope | ... | ... | ... |105 | Credibility | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low |106 ```1071084. **Synthesize**109 - Where do sources agree? (convergent findings = stronger signal)110 - Where do they disagree? (divergent findings = needs investigation)111 - What gaps exist across all sources?112 - What's the weight of evidence for each position?1131145. **Produce synthesis brief**115 ```116 ## Consensus Findings117 [What most sources agree on]118119 ## Contested Points120 [Where sources disagree, with strongest evidence for each side]121122 ## Gaps123 [What none of the sources address]124125 ## Recommendation126 [Based on weight of evidence, what should the reader believe/do?]127 ```128129### `/research:cite` — Citation Extraction1301311. **Scan document** for all references, footnotes, in-text citations1322. **Extract and format** using the requested style (APA 7 default)1333. **Classify citations** by type:134 - Primary sources (original research, data)135 - Secondary sources (reviews, meta-analyses, commentary)136 - Tertiary sources (textbooks, encyclopedias)1374. **Output** sorted bibliography with classification tags138139Supported citation formats:140- **APA 7** (default) — social sciences, business141- **IEEE** — engineering, computer science142- **Chicago** — humanities, history143- **Harvard** — general academic144- **MLA 9** — arts, humanities145146---147148## Tooling149150### `scripts/extract_citations.py`151152CLI utility for extracting and formatting citations from text.153154**Features:**155- Regex-based citation detection (DOI, URL, author-year, numbered references)156- Multiple output formats (APA, IEEE, Chicago, Harvard, MLA)157- JSON export for integration with reference managers158- Deduplication of repeated citations159160**Usage:**161```bash162# Extract citations from a file (APA format, default)163python3 scripts/extract_citations.py document.txt164165# Specify format166python3 scripts/extract_citations.py document.txt --format ieee167168# JSON output169python3 scripts/extract_citations.py document.txt --format apa --output json170171# From stdin172cat paper.txt | python3 scripts/extract_citations.py --stdin173```174175### `scripts/format_summary.py`176177CLI utility for generating structured research summaries.178179**Features:**180- Multiple summary templates (academic, article, report, executive)181- Configurable output length (brief, standard, detailed)182- Markdown and plain text output183- Key findings extraction with evidence tagging184185**Usage:**186```bash187# Generate structured summary template188python3 scripts/format_summary.py --template academic189190# Brief executive summary format191python3 scripts/format_summary.py --template executive --length brief192193# All templates listed194python3 scripts/format_summary.py --list-templates195196# JSON output197python3 scripts/format_summary.py --template article --output json198```199200---201202## Quality Assessment Framework203204Rate every source on four dimensions:205206| Dimension | High | Medium | Low |207|-----------|------|--------|-----|208| **Credibility** | Peer-reviewed, established author | Reputable outlet, known author | Blog, unknown author, no review |209| **Evidence** | Large sample, rigorous method | Moderate data, sound approach | Anecdotal, no data, opinion |210| **Recency** | Published within 2 years | 2-5 years old | 5+ years, may be outdated |211| **Objectivity** | No conflicts, balanced view | Minor affiliations disclosed | Funded by interested party, one-sided |212213**Overall Rating:**214- 4 Highs = Strong source — cite with confidence215- 2+ Mediums = Adequate source — cite with caveats216- 2+ Lows = Weak source — verify independently before citing217218---219220## Summary Templates221222See `references/summary-templates.md` for:223- Academic paper summary template (IMRAD)224- Web article summary template (claim-evidence-implication)225- Technical report template (executive summary)226- Comparative analysis template (matrix + synthesis)227- Literature review template (thematic organization)228229See `references/citation-formats.md` for:230- APA 7 formatting rules and examples231- IEEE formatting rules and examples232- Chicago, Harvard, MLA quick reference233234---235236## Proactive Triggers237238Flag these without being asked:239240- **Source has no date** → Note it. Undated sources lose credibility points.241- **Source contradicts other sources** → Highlight the contradiction explicitly. Don't paper over disagreements.242- **Source is behind a paywall** → Note limited access. Suggest alternatives if known.243- **User provides only one source for a compare** → Ask for at least one more. Comparison needs 2+.244- **Citations are incomplete** → Flag missing fields (year, author, title). Don't invent metadata.245- **Source is 5+ years old in a fast-moving field** → Warn about potential obsolescence.246247---248249## Installation250251### One-liner (any tool)252```bash253git clone https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills.git254cp -r claude-skills/produto/resumo-de-pesquisa ~/.claude/skills/255```256257### Multi-tool install258```bash259./scripts/convert.sh --skill resumo-de-pesquisa --tool codex|gemini|cursor|windsurf|openclaw260```261262### OpenClaw263```bash264clawhub install cs-resumo-de-pesquisa265```266267---268269## Related Skills270271- **analytics-de-produto** — Quantitative analysis. Complementary — use resumo-de-pesquisa for qualitative sources, analytics-de-produto for metrics.272- **teardown-competitivo** — Competitive research. Complementary — use resumo-de-pesquisa for individual source analysis, teardown-competitivo for market landscape.273- **content-production** — Content writing. Research-summarizer feeds content-production — summarize sources first, then write.274- **descoberta-de-produto** — Discovery frameworks. Complementary — resumo-de-pesquisa for desk research, descoberta-de-produto for user research.