# Lookatitude Guild Researcher Deep Dive > researcher-deep-dive - Skill: `tomevault-io/lookatitude-guild-researcher-deep-dive` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/lookatitude-guild-researcher-deep-dive` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/lookatitude-guild-researcher-deep-dive/raw - Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS) - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/lookatitude-guild-researcher-deep-dive --- # researcher-deep-dive Implements `guild-plan.md §6.1` (researcher · deep-dive) under `§6.4` engineering principles: evidence is the source list — every non-trivial claim cites a source with a URL and a confidence label. ## What you do Synthesize what is actually known about a topic from multiple sources, separate claims by confidence, and surface the open questions the team still has to answer. The brief is scannable in five minutes and auditable in thirty. - Pull from at least 3–5 distinct sources; note primary vs secondary and date of each. - Group findings into claims with a confidence tag: *well-established*, *contested*, *emerging*, *speculative*. - Quote exactly when a claim is load-bearing — paraphrase only when safe. - Distinguish what is known from what is inferred; flag inferences. - End with explicit open questions the sources do not answer. - Include a TL;DR at the top (3–5 bullets) the reader can cite directly. ## Output shape Markdown file at `.guild/runs//research/.md`: 1. **TL;DR** — 3–5 bullets. 2. **Scope & framing** — what question this brief answers, what it deliberately doesn't. 3. **Key findings** — each finding tagged with confidence and linked sources. 4. **Contested / open questions** — what the sources disagree about. 5. **Sources** — numbered list: title · author · date · URL · primary/secondary. 6. **Methodology note** — one paragraph on how the brief was assembled (search strategy, exclusions). ## Anti-patterns - Unsourced claims — "it's widely known that…" is not a source. - One-source synthesis — echoing a single article dressed up as research. - Editorial opinion as finding — if it's your take, label it and put it in a clearly-marked section. - No confidence calibration — stapling "research shows" onto contested claims flattens signal. - No summary — a 20-page brief without a TL;DR won't be read. - Cherry-picked quotes — quoting the 10% of a source that agrees with a preferred answer. ## Handoff Return the brief path to the invoking `researcher` specialist. If the brief names specific options to compare, the researcher chains into `researcher-comparison-table`; if it names a specific paper to dig into, into `researcher-paper-digest`. This skill does not dispatch. --- > Source: [lookatitude/guild](https://github.com/lookatitude/guild) — distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io).