External Research Workflow
Research external sources (documentation, web, APIs) for libraries, best practices, and general topics.
Note: The current year is 2025. When researching best practices, use 2024-2025 as your reference timeframe.
Invocation
/research-external <focus> [options]
Question Flow (No Arguments)
If the user types just
with no or partial arguments, guide them through this question flow. Use AskUserQuestion for each phase.
Phase 1: Research Type
yaml
question: "What kind of information do you need?"
header: "Type"
options:
- label: "How to use a library/package"
description: "API docs, examples, patterns"
- label: "Best practices for a task"
description: "Recommended approaches, comparisons"
- label: "General topic research"
description: "Comprehensive multi-source search"
- label: "Compare options/alternatives"
description: "Which tool/library/approach is best"
Mapping:
- "How to use library" → library focus
- "Best practices" → best-practices focus
- "General topic" → general focus
- "Compare options" → best-practices with comparison framing
Phase 2: Specific Topic
yaml
question: "What specifically do you want to research?"
header: "Topic"
options: [] # Free text input
Examples of good answers:
- "How to use Prisma ORM with TypeScript"
- "Best practices for error handling in Python"
- "React vs Vue vs Svelte for dashboards"
Phase 3: Library Details (if library focus)
If user selected library focus:
yaml
question: "Which package registry?"
header: "Registry"
options:
- label: "npm (JavaScript/TypeScript)"
description: "Node.js packages"
- label: "PyPI (Python)"
description: "Python packages"
- label: "crates.io (Rust)"
description: "Rust crates"
- label: "Go modules"
description: "Go packages"
Then ask for specific library name if not already provided.
Phase 4: Depth
yaml
question: "How thorough should the research be?"
header: "Depth"
options:
- label: "Quick answer"
description: "Just the essentials"
- label: "Thorough research"
description: "Multiple sources, examples, edge cases"
Mapping:
- "Quick answer" → --depth shallow
- "Thorough" → --depth thorough
Phase 5: Output
yaml
question: "What should I produce?"
header: "Output"
options:
- label: "Summary in chat"
description: "Tell me what you found"
- label: "Research document"
description: "Write to thoughts/shared/research/"
- label: "Handoff for implementation"
description: "Prepare context for coding"
Mapping:
- "Research document" → --output doc
- "Handoff" → --output handoff
Summary Before Execution
Based on your answers, I'll research:
**Focus:** library
**Topic:** "Prisma ORM connection pooling"
**Library:** prisma (npm)
**Depth:** thorough
**Output:** doc
Proceed? [Yes / Adjust settings]
Focus Modes (First Argument)
| Focus | Primary Tool | Purpose |
|---|
| nia-docs | API docs, usage patterns, code examples |
| perplexity-search | Recommended approaches, patterns, comparisons |
| All MCP tools | Comprehensive multi-source research |
Options
| Option | Values | Description |
|---|
| | Required. The topic/library/concept to research |
| , | Search depth (default: shallow) |
| , | Output format (default: doc) |
| | For focus: specific package name |
| , , , | For focus: package registry |
Workflow
Step 1: Parse Arguments
Extract from user input:
FOCUS=$1 # library | best-practices | general
TOPIC="..." # from --topic
DEPTH="shallow" # from --depth (default: shallow)
OUTPUT="doc" # from --output (default: doc)
LIBRARY="..." # from --library (optional)
REGISTRY="npm" # from --registry (default: npm)
Step 2: Execute Research by Focus
Focus:
Primary tool: nia-docs - Find API documentation, usage patterns, code examples.
bash
# Semantic search in package
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/mcp/nia_docs.py \
--package "$LIBRARY" \
--registry "$REGISTRY" \
--query "$TOPIC" \
--limit 10)
# If thorough depth, also grep for specific patterns
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/mcp/nia_docs.py \
--package "$LIBRARY" \
--grep "$TOPIC")
# Supplement with official docs if URL known
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/mcp/firecrawl_scrape.py \
--url "https://docs.example.com/api/$TOPIC" \
--format markdown)
Thorough depth additions:
- Multiple semantic queries with variations
- Grep for specific function/class names
- Scrape official documentation pages
Focus:
Primary tool: perplexity-search - Find recommended approaches, patterns, anti-patterns.
bash
# AI-synthesized research (sonar-pro)
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python scripts/mcp/perplexity_search.py \
--research "$TOPIC best practices 2024 2025")
# If comparing alternatives
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python scripts/mcp/perplexity_search.py \
--reason "$TOPIC vs alternatives - which to choose?")
Thorough depth additions:
bash
# Chain-of-thought for complex decisions
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python scripts/mcp/perplexity_search.py \
--reason "$TOPIC tradeoffs and considerations 2025")
# Deep comprehensive research
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python scripts/mcp/perplexity_search.py \
--deep "$TOPIC comprehensive guide 2025")
# Recent developments
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python scripts/mcp/perplexity_search.py \
--search "$TOPIC latest developments" \
--recency month --max-results 5)
Focus:
Use ALL available MCP tools - comprehensive multi-source research.
Step 2a: Library documentation (nia-docs)
bash
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/mcp/nia_docs.py \
--search "$TOPIC")
Step 2b: Web research (perplexity)
bash
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python scripts/mcp/perplexity_search.py \
--research "$TOPIC")
Step 2c: Specific documentation (firecrawl)
bash
# Scrape relevant documentation pages found in perplexity results
(cd $CLAUDE_OPC_DIR && uv run python -m runtime.harness scripts/mcp/firecrawl_scrape.py \
--url "$FOUND_DOC_URL" \
--format markdown)
Thorough depth additions:
- Run all three tools with expanded queries
- Cross-reference findings between sources
- Follow links from initial results for deeper context
Step 3: Synthesize Findings
Combine results from all sources:
- Key Concepts - Core ideas and terminology
- Code Examples - Working examples from documentation
- Best Practices - Recommended approaches
- Pitfalls - Common mistakes to avoid
- Alternatives - Other options considered
- Sources - URLs for all citations
Step 4: Write Output
Output: (default)
Write to:
thoughts/shared/research/YYYY-MM-DD-{topic-slug}.md
markdown
---
date: {ISO timestamp}
type: external-research
topic: "{topic}"
focus: {focus}
sources: [nia, perplexity, firecrawl]
status: complete
---
# Research: {Topic}
## Summary
{2-3 sentence summary of findings}
## Key Findings
### Library Documentation
{From nia-docs - API references, usage patterns}
### Best Practices (2024-2025)
{From perplexity - recommended approaches}
### Code Examples
```{language}
// Working examples found
Recommendations
- {Recommendation 1}
- {Recommendation 2}
Pitfalls to Avoid
Alternatives Considered
| Option | Pros | Cons |
|---|
| {Option 1} | ... | ... |
Sources
#### Output: `handoff`
Write to: `thoughts/shared/handoffs/{session}/research-{topic-slug}.yaml`
```yaml
---
type: research-handoff
ts: {ISO timestamp}
topic: "{topic}"
focus: {focus}
status: complete
---
goal: Research {topic} for implementation planning
sources_used: [nia, perplexity, firecrawl]
findings:
key_concepts:
- {concept1}
- {concept2}
code_examples:
- pattern: "{pattern name}"
code: |
// example code
best_practices:
- {practice1}
- {practice2}
pitfalls:
- {pitfall1}
recommendations:
- {rec1}
- {rec2}
sources:
- title: "{Source 1}"
url: "{url1}"
type: {documentation|article|reference}
for_plan_agent: |
Based on research, the recommended approach is:
1. {Step 1}
2. {Step 2}
Key libraries: {lib1}, {lib2}
Avoid: {pitfall1}
Step 5: Return Summary
Research Complete
Topic: {topic}
Focus: {focus}
Output: {path to file}
Key findings:
- {Finding 1}
- {Finding 2}
- {Finding 3}
Sources: {N} sources cited
{If handoff output:}
Ready for plan-agent to continue.
Error Handling
If an MCP tool fails (API key missing, rate limited, etc.):
-
Log the failure in output:
yaml
tool_status:
nia: success
perplexity: failed (rate limited)
firecrawl: skipped
-
Continue with other sources - partial results are valuable
-
Set status appropriately:
- - All requested tools succeeded
- - Some tools failed, findings still useful
- - No useful results obtained
-
Note gaps in findings:
markdown
## Gaps
- Perplexity unavailable - best practices section limited to nia results
Examples
Library Research (Shallow)
/research-external library --topic "dependency injection" --library fastapi --registry py_pi
Best Practices (Thorough)
/research-external best-practices --topic "error handling in Python async" --depth thorough
General Research for Handoff
/research-external general --topic "OAuth2 PKCE flow implementation" --depth thorough --output handoff
Quick Library Lookup
/research-external library --topic "useEffect cleanup" --library react
Integration with Other Skills
| After Research | Use Skill | For |
|---|
| | Create implementation plan |
| Code examples found | | Direct implementation |
| Architecture decision | | Detailed planning |
| Library comparison | Present to user | Decision making |
Required Environment
- or server in mcp_config.json
- in environment or
- and server in mcp_config.json
Notes
- NOT for codebase exploration - Use or for that
- Always cite sources - Include URLs for all findings
- 2024-2025 timeframe - Focus on current best practices
- Graceful degradation - Partial results better than no results