Atlas / Skills / davepoon / Research Phase

Research PhaseSAFE

skills/davepoon/research-phase

A single hub to find Claude Skills, Agents, Commands, Hooks, Plugins, and Marketplace collections to extend Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Agent SDK and OpenClaw

Verdict
SAFE
Grade
B
Trust score
89 /100
Version
—
Hosts
—
License
MIT
Stars
3,604
01

Overview

A single hub to find Claude Skills, Agents, Commands, Hooks, Plugins, and Marketplace collections to extend Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Agent SDK and OpenClaw

Read from source at commit 80a0afd96301OBSERVED · 2026-10-07
02

What it tells the agent

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: gsd:research-phase
description: Research how to implement a phase (standalone - usually use /gsd:plan-phase instead)
argument-hint: "[phase]"
allowed-tools:
  - Read
  - Bash
  - Task
---

<objective>
Research how to implement a phase. Spawns gsd-phase-researcher agent with phase context.

**Note:** This is a standalone research command. For most workflows, use `/gsd:plan-phase` which integrates research automatically.

**Use this command when:**
- You want to research without planning yet
- You want to re-research after planning is complete
- You need to investigate before deciding if a phase is feasible

**Orchestrator role:** Parse phase, validate against roadmap, check existing research, gather context, spawn researcher agent, present results.

**Why subagent:** Research burns context fast (WebSearch, Context7 queries, source verification). Fresh 200k context for investigation. Main context stays lean for user interaction.
</objective>

<available_agent_types>
Valid GSD subagent types (use exact names — do not fall back to 'general-purpose'):
- gsd-phase-researcher — Researches technical approaches for a phase
</available_agent_types>

<context>
Phase number: $ARGUMENTS (required)

Normalize phase input in step 1 before any directory lookups.
</context>

<process>

## 0. Initialize Context

```bash
INIT=$(gsd-sdk query init.phase-op "$ARGUMENTS")
if [[ "$INIT" == @file:* ]]; then INIT=$(cat "${INIT#@file:}"); fi
```

Extract from init JSON: `phase_dir`, `phase_number`, `phase_name`, `phase_found`, `commit_docs`, `has_research`, `state_path`, `requirements_path`, `context_path`, `research_path`.

Resolve researcher model:
```bash
RESEARCHER_MODEL=$(gsd-sdk query resolve-model gsd-phase-researcher --raw)
```

## 1. Validate Phase

```bash
PHASE_INFO=$(gsd-sdk query roadmap.get-phase "${phase_number}")
```

**If `found` is false:** Error and exit. **If `found` is true:** Extract `phase_number`, `phase_name`, `goal` from JSON.

## 2. Check Existing Research

```bash
ls .planning/phases/${PHASE}-*/RESEARCH.md 2>/dev/null
```

**If exists:** Offer: 1) Update research, 2) View existing, 3) Skip. Wait for response.

**If doesn't exist:** Continue.

## 3. Gather Phase Context

Use paths from INIT (do not inline file contents in orchestrator context):
- `requirements_path`
- `context_path`
- `state_path`

Present summary with phase description and what files the researcher will load.

## 4. Spawn gsd-phase-researcher Agent

Research modes: ecosystem (default), feasibility, implementation, comparison.

```markdown
<research_type>
Phase Research — investigating HOW to implement a specific phase well.
</research_type>

<key_insight>
The question is NOT "which library should I use?"

The question is: "What do I not know that I don't know?"

For this phase, discover:
- What's the established architecture pattern?
- What libraries form the standard stack?
- What problems do people commonly hit?
- What's SOTA vs what Claude's training thinks is SOTA?
- What should NOT be hand-rolled?
</key_insight>

<objective>
Research implementation approach for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
Mode: ecosystem
</objective>

<files_to_read>
- {requirements_path} (Requirements)
- {context_path} (Phase context from discuss-phase, if exists)
- {state_path} (Prior project decisions and blockers)
</files_to_read>

<additional_context>
**Phase description:** {phase_description}
</additional_context>

<downstream_consumer>
Your RESEARCH.md will be loaded by `/gsd:plan-phase` which uses specific sections:
- `## Standard Stack` → Plans use these libraries
- `## Architecture Patterns` → Task structure follows these
- `## Don't Hand-Roll` → Tasks NEVER build custom solutions for listed problems
- `## Common Pitfalls` → Verification steps check for these
- `## Code Examples` → Task actions reference these patterns

Be prescriptive, not exploratory. "Use X" not "Consider X or Y."
</downstream_consumer>

<quality_gate>
Before declaring complete, verify:
- [ ] All domains investigated (not just some)
- [ ] Negative claims verified with official docs
- [ ] Multiple sources for critical claims
- [ ] Confidence levels assigned honestly
- [ ] Section names match what plan-phase expects
</quality_gate>

<output>
Write to: .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md
</output>
```

```
Task(
  prompt=filled_prompt,
  subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
  model="{researcher_model}",
  description="Research Phase {phase}"
)
```

## 5. Handle Agent Return

**`## RESEARCH COMPLETE`:** Display summary, offer: Plan phase, Dig deeper, Review full, Done.

**`## CHECKPOINT REACHED`:** Present to user, get response, spawn continuation.

**`## RESEARCH INCONCLUSIVE`:** Show what was attempted, offer: Add context, Try different mode, Manual.

## 6. Spawn Continuation Agent

```markdown
<objective>
Continue research for Phase {phase_number}: {phase_name}
</objective>

<prior_state>
<files_to_read>
- .planning/phases/${PHASE}-{slug}/${PHASE}-RESEARCH.md (Existing research)
</files_to_read>
</prior_state>

<checkpoint_response>
**Type:** {checkpoint_type}
**Response:** {user_response}
</checkpoint_response>
```

```
Task(
  prompt=continuation_prompt,
  subagent_type="gsd-phase-researcher",
  model="{researcher_model}",
  description="Continue research Phase {phase}"
)
```

</process>

<success_criteria>
- [ ] Phase validated against roadmap
- [ ] Existing research checked
- [ ] gsd-phase-researcher spawned with context
- [ ] Checkpoints handled correctly
- [ ] User knows next steps
</success_criteria>
03

Trust audit

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

LayerWhat it checksResult
L0Provenance & inventoryPASS
L1Static analysis of the codeNA
L2Instruction surface (what it tells the agent)PASS
L3Class-specific surfacePASS
L4Behavioural (sandbox)SKIPPED

What the source does

Filesystem
none-observed
Network
none-observed
Shell
none-observed
Dependencies
pinned
Secrets in source
none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.

Audited 2026-10-07 · audit v0.4.1 · source sha 80a0afd96301full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/davepoon__research-phase.json · Report an issue / request a re-scan
04

Audit history

Every audit this skill has had.

DateSourceVerdictGradeScoreChange
2026-10-0780a0afd96301SAFEB89first audit
05

Questions

What does the Research Phase skill do?

A single hub to find Claude Skills, Agents, Commands, Hooks, Plugins, and Marketplace collections to extend Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Agent SDK and OpenClaw

Is Research Phase safe to install?

The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.

What can Research Phase access on my machine?

The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.

How current is this page?

The grade is for one exact copy of the source (80a0afd96301), read on 2026-10-07. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Advertisement