---
name: deep-research
description: |
  Use when conducting in-depth research, gathering sources, writing research summaries with citations,
  or analyzing topics from multiple perspectives where evidence quality and synthesis matter.
license: MIT
metadata:
  author: awesome-llm-apps
  version: "1.1.0"
---

# Deep Research

Use dedicated research subagent when available. Keep parent session focused on scope, delegation, and final synthesis.

## When to Apply

Use this skill when:
- Conducting in-depth research on a topic
- Synthesizing information from multiple sources
- Creating research summaries with proper citations
- Analyzing different viewpoints and perspectives
- Identifying key findings and trends
- Evaluating the quality and credibility of sources

## Execution Pattern

**Subagent-first:** If subagent dispatch is available and a `researcher` subagent exists, delegate research work to it. If the platform only supports generic subagents, dispatch a fresh research-focused subagent with equivalent instructions.

Why:
- preserves parent session context
- gives research work isolated scope
- makes source gathering and synthesis repeatable

**Fallback:** If subagents are unavailable, follow the same workflow in the current session.

### Delegation Checklist

Before dispatch:
- Clarify scope if the request is ambiguous
- Write concrete coverage requirements; do not send vague prompts
- Include citation, source-quality, and uncertainty rules
- Include exact output sections required from the subagent

### Researcher Handoff Template

Send a self-contained task. Do not make the subagent infer missing requirements.

```text
Research topic: {QUESTION}
Purpose/context: {PURPOSE}

Requirements — Detailed Analysis must cover:
- {ANGLE_OR_SUBTOPIC_1}
- {ANGLE_OR_SUBTOPIC_2}
- {ANGLE_OR_SUBTOPIC_3}

Constraints:
- Use numbered citations [1], [2] for every external claim
- Prefer peer-reviewed papers, official reports, and primary sources when available
- Flag company claims, news summaries, and weak evidence as lower-confidence
- Call out uncertainty, disagreement, and evidence gaps explicitly
- Research only; do not modify files

Output sections:
- Executive Summary
- Key Findings
- Detailed Analysis
- Areas of Consensus
- Areas of Debate
- Sources
- Gaps and Further Research
```

### After Subagent Returns

- Check that claims are cited and scope is covered
- Spot-check weak or surprising claims against sources
- Present the final answer in the requested depth
- Preserve uncertainty and debate where the evidence is mixed

## Research Process

Follow this systematic approach:

### 1. **Clarify the Research Question**
- What exactly needs to be researched?
- What level of detail is required?
- Are there specific angles to prioritize?
- What is the purpose of the research?

### 2. **Identify Key Aspects**
- Break the topic into subtopics or dimensions
- List main questions to answer
- Note important context or background needed

### 3. **Gather Information**
- Consider multiple perspectives
- Look for primary and secondary sources
- Check publication dates and currency
- Evaluate source credibility

### 4. **Synthesize Findings**
- Identify patterns and themes
- Note areas of consensus and disagreement
- Highlight key insights
- Connect related information

### 5. **Document Sources**
- Use numbered citations [1], [2], etc.
- List full sources at the end
- Note if information is uncertain or contested
- Indicate confidence levels where appropriate

## Output Format

Structure your research as:

```markdown
## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentence overview of key findings]

## Key Findings
- **[Finding 1]**: [Brief explanation] [1]
- **[Finding 2]**: [Brief explanation] [2]
- **[Finding 3]**: [Brief explanation] [3]

## Detailed Analysis

### [Subtopic 1]
[In-depth analysis with citations]

### [Subtopic 2]
[In-depth analysis with citations]

## Areas of Consensus
[What sources agree on]

## Areas of Debate
[Where sources disagree or uncertainty exists]

## Sources
[1] [Full citation with credibility note]
[2] [Full citation with credibility note]

## Gaps and Further Research
[What's still unknown or needs investigation]
```

## Source Evaluation Criteria

When citing sources, note:

- **Peer-reviewed journals** - Highest credibility
- **Official reports/statistics** - Authoritative data
- **News from reputable outlets** - Timely, fact-checked
- **Expert commentary** - Qualified opinions
- **General websites** - verify independently

## Common Mistakes

- **Vague delegation** - "Research X" is too loose; include must-cover dimensions and output sections
- **Missing citation rules** - Require citations for every external claim, not just the final bullet or paragraph
- **Missing source hierarchy** - State preferred source types so lower-credibility material is labeled correctly
- **Unqualified company claims** - Mark vendor announcements as unverified unless independent evidence supports them

## Example

**User Request:** "Research the benefits and risks of intermittent fasting"

**Response:**

## Executive Summary

Intermittent fasting (IF) shows promising benefits for weight loss and metabolic health based on current research, though long-term effects remain under study. Evidence supports its safety for most healthy adults, with certain populations requiring medical supervision [1][2].

## Key Findings

- **Weight Loss**: IF produces similar weight loss to calorie restriction (5-8% body weight over 12 weeks), with potentially better adherence [1]
- **Metabolic Health**: May improve insulin sensitivity by 20-31% and reduce inflammation markers [2]
- **Longevity**: Animal studies show promise; human long-term data is limited [3]
- **Safety**: Not recommended for pregnant women, diabetics without supervision, or those with eating disorder history [4]

## Detailed Analysis

### Weight Management
Studies comparing IF to traditional calorie restriction show similar weight loss outcomes. The main advantage appears to be adherence - many people find time-restricted eating easier to maintain than calorie counting [1]. Typical results show 5-8% body weight loss over 12-16 weeks.

Common IF protocols:
- **16:8** - 16 hours fasting, 8-hour eating window
- **5:2** - Normal eating 5 days, restricted calories 2 days
- **Alternate day** - Alternating between fasting and eating days

### Metabolic Effects
Research indicates improvements in several biomarkers [2]:
- Fasting insulin levels decreased 20-31%
- Blood pressure reductions (3-8 mmHg systolic)
- Inflammatory marker (CRP) reductions
- Improved lipid profiles in some studies

However, individual responses vary significantly. Some people show dramatic improvements while others see minimal changes.

### Potential Mechanisms
Several explanations for observed benefits:
1. **Caloric restriction** - IF naturally reduces total calories
2. **Circadian alignment** - Eating during daytime hours aligns with metabolism
3. **Autophagy** - Cellular cleanup processes activated during fasting
4. **Hormetic stress** - Mild stress that improves adaptation

### Safety Considerations
While generally safe for healthy adults, certain groups should avoid IF or proceed with medical supervision [4]:
- Pregnant or breastfeeding women
- People with diabetes (risk of hypoglycemia)
- History of eating disorders
- Children and adolescents
- Those taking medications requiring food

Common side effects during adaptation (1-2 weeks):
- Hunger and irritability
- Headaches
- Fatigue
- Difficulty concentrating

## Areas of Consensus

- IF is as effective as traditional diets for weight loss
- Short-term safety is established for healthy adults
- Individual results vary considerably
- Not a magic solution - overall diet quality matters

## Areas of Debate

- **Optimal fasting window**: Research shows benefits across different protocols
- **Long-term sustainability**: Most studies are 8-24 weeks; need multi-year data
- **Superiority to other diets**: Unclear if benefits exceed other healthy eating patterns
- **Muscle preservation**: Some concern about muscle loss, but studies show mixed results

## Sources

[1] Varady KA, et al. "Clinical application of intermittent fasting for weight loss." *Nature Reviews Endocrinology*, 2022. (Systematic review, high credibility)

[2] de Cabo R, Mattson MP. "Effects of Intermittent Fasting on Health, Aging, and Disease." *New England Journal of Medicine*, 2019. (Peer-reviewed, authoritative review)

[3] Longo VD, Panda S. "Fasting, Circadian Rhythms, and Time-Restricted Feeding in Healthy Lifespan." *Cell Metabolism*, 2016. (Mechanistic research, preliminary human data)

[4] Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. "Position on Intermittent Fasting." 2022. (Professional organization guidelines)

## Gaps and Further Research

- **Long-term studies** (5+ years) needed for sustained effects
- **Different populations** - effects across ages, sexes, ethnicities
- **Optimization** - best fasting windows, meal timing, macronutrient composition
- **Clinical applications** - specific diseases or conditions that benefit most