research

# /research — Focused Investigation

## When to Use

- Evaluating whether a dependency has a newer version or has been superseded
- Finding community best practices for a specific technical problem
- Reading official documentation for an API or library
- Investigating how other projects solve a similar problem
- Checking if a pattern used in the codebase has known issues
- Any time you need external information before making a decision

**Don't use when:** you need to act on findings immediately (use /marshal which calls /research internally).

## Modes

**Single (default):** one agent, 2-4 queries, 3-6 sources. Steps 1-5 below.

**Parallel (`/research --parallel`):** scout agents investigate independent
angles of the same question using Fleet wave mechanics. See Parallel Mode
below. Without the flag, prefer parallel mode (and say so in the plan) when
the question naturally decomposes into 3+ independent angles: evaluating
multiple competing technologies or approaches, distinct sub-questions that
don't depend on each other, or time-sensitive research where parallel
execution matters.

If the question is narrow and focused, stay single-agent. Don't parallelize
what a single agent can answer in 5 minutes.

## Protocol (Single Mode)

### Step 1: FORMULATE

Convert the research question into 2-4 specific search queries:
- Official docs query (e.g., "express.js middleware error handling docs")
- Community/GitHub query (e.g., "express error middleware best practices site:github.com")
- Technical blog/comparison query (e.g., "express vs fastify error handling 2025")
- Release notes query if version-specific (e.g., "express 5.x changelog breaking changes")

State the question clearly in one sentence before searching.

### Step 2: SEARCH

Execute searches and read actual content (not just snippets):
- Use WebSearch for discovery, WebFetch for reading actual pages
- Evaluate source credibility: official docs > GitHub repos with stars > recent blog posts > forum answers
- Stop at 3-6 credible sources (not exhaustive — focused)
- If a source contradicts another, note the disagreement

The WebFetch Restrictions under Parallel Mode apply in single mode too: never
WebFetch rendered GitHub pages.

### Step 3: EXTRACT

For each finding, record:
- **What**: The specific fact, recommendation, or pattern discovered
- **Source**: URL or reference
- **Relevance**: How this applies to the original question (one sentence)
- **Confidence**: high (official docs, verified), medium (community consensus), low (single source, opinion)
- **Action**: What the codebase should do with this information (or "informational only")

### Step 4: WRITE

Write findings to `.planning/research/{topic-slug}.md`:

````markdown
# Research: {Topic}

> Question: {The original question}
> Date: {ISO date}
> Confidence: {overall: high/medium/low}

## Findings

### 1. {Finding title}
**What:** {description}
**Source:** {URL}
**Confidence:** {high/medium/low}
**Action:** {recommendation or "informational"}

### 2. {Finding title}
...

## Summary
{2-3 sentences: what was learned, what the recommendation is}

## Open Questions
{Anything that couldn't be resolved — needs human judgment or deeper investigation}
````

### Step 5: RETURN

Return the summary and recommendation to the caller (user, Marshal, or Archon).
The research document persists for future reference.

## Parallel Mode (--parallel)

Formerly /research-fleet, which is now a deprecated stub pointing here. Spawns
multiple scout agents, each investigating a different angle of the same
question. Findings are compressed between waves. Produces a unified research
brief from multiple independent perspectives.

**Inputs:** the question, plus optional **angles** (specific sub-questions to
investigate). If not provided, decompose the question into 3-5 angles
automatically.

### Step P1: DECOMPOSE

Break the research question into 3-5 independent angles:

Example: "Should we migrate from Express to Fastify?"
- Scout 1: Performance benchmarks (Express vs Fastify vs Hono, latest data)
- Scout 2: Migration effort (breaking changes, middleware compatibility, ecosystem)
- Scout 3: Community health (GitHub stars trend, npm downloads, maintainer activity)
- Scout 4: Production war stories (who migrated, what broke, was it worth it)

Each angle must be:
- Independent (scout doesn't need another scout's findings to do its work)
- Specific (one clear question per scout)
- Answerable (3-6 sources should be sufficient)

### Step P2: DEPLOY WAVE 1

Spawn one scout agent per angle using Fleet wave mechanics:

For each scout:
1. Create an isolated worktree
2. Inject the scout's specific angle as the research question
3. Each scout follows the single-mode protocol (formulate, search, extract, write)
4. Each scout writes its findings to `.planning/research/fleet-{slug}/{angle-slug}.md`

All scouts run in parallel. Wait for all to complete.

### Step P3: COMPRESS

After Wave 1 completes:

1. Read all scout findings
2. Identify:
   - **Consensus**: findings that multiple scouts independently confirmed
   - **Conflicts**: findings that contradict each other (flag these prominently)
   - **Gaps**: angles that didn't produce strong results (consider a Wave 2)
   - **Surprises**: unexpected findings that change the framing of the question
3. Compress into a unified brief (~500 tokens)

### Step P4: WAVE 2 (Optional)

If gaps or conflicts exist:

1. Spawn targeted scouts to resolve specific conflicts or fill gaps
2. Each Wave 2 scout receives the compressed brief from Wave 1 as context
3. Wave 2 scouts don't re-research what Wave 1 already covered

Skip Wave 2 if Wave 1 produced clear, consistent findings.

### Step P5: REPORT

Write the unified report to `.planning/research/fleet-{slug}/REPORT.md`:

```markdown
# Research Fleet: {Topic}

> Question: {The original question}
> Date: {ISO date}
> Scouts: {N} across {waves} wave(s)
> Confidence: {overall: high/medium/low}

## Consensus Findings
{Findings confirmed