pipeline
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy +…
Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 7 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill deep-research -a windsurf -y
name: deep-research description: "Universal deep research agent team. 13-agent pipeline for rigorous academic research on any topic. 7 modes: full research, quick brief, paper review, lit-review, fact-check, Socratic guided research dialogue, and systematic review with optional meta-analysis. Covers research question formulation, Socratic mentoring, methodology design, systematic literature search, source verification, cross-source synthesis, risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis, APA 7.0 report compilation, editorial review, devil's advocate challenges, ethics review, and post-research literature monitoring. Triggers on: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, guide my research, help me think through, 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 事實查核, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 幫我想想, 我不確定要研究什麼, 研究方向, 研究主題." metadata: version: "2.4" last_updated: "2026-03-27"
Universal deep research tool — a domain-agnostic 13-agent team for rigorous academic research on any topic.
**v2.4** adds writing quality improvements to the report compiler:
**Minimal command:**
Research the impact of AI on higher education quality assurance
**Socratic mode:**
Guide my research on the impact of declining birth rates on private universities 引導我的研究:少子化對私立大學的影響 幫我釐清我的研究方向,我對高教品保有興趣但還不太確定
**Execution:** 1. Scoping — Research question + methodology blueprint 2. Investigation — Systematic literature search + source verification 3. Analysis — Cross-source synthesis + bias check 4. Composition — Full APA 7.0 report 5. Review — Editorial + ethics + vulnerability scan 6. Revision — Final polished report
---
**English**: research, deep research, literature review, systematic review, meta-analysis, PRISMA, evidence synthesis, fact-check, methodology, APA report, academic analysis, policy analysis, guide my research, help me think through, monitor this topic, set up alerts
**繁體中文**: 研究, 深度研究, 文獻回顧, 文獻探討, 系統性回顧, 後設分析, 證據綜整, 事實查核, 研究方法, 學術分析, 政策分析, 引導我的研究, 幫我釐清, 監測這個主題, 設定追蹤
Activate `socratic` mode when the user's **intent** matches any of the following patterns, **regardless of language**. Detect meaning, not exact keywords.
**Intent signals** (any one is sufficient): 1. User has no clear research question and wants guided thinking 2. User asks to be "led", "guided", or "mentored" through research 3. User expresses uncertainty about what to research or where to start 4. User wants to brainstorm, explore, or clarify a research direction 5. User describes a vague interest without a specific, answerable question
**Default rule**: When intent is ambiguous between `socratic` and `full`, **prefer `socratic`** — it is safer to guide first than to produce an unwanted report. The user can always switch to `full` later.
**Example triggers** (illustrative, not exhaustive): "guide my research", "help me think through", 「引導我的研究」「幫我釐清」, or equivalent in any language
| Scenario | Use Instead | |----------|-------------| | Writing a paper (not researching) | `academic-paper` | | Reviewing a paper (structured review) | `academic-paper-reviewer` | | Full research-to-paper pipeline | `academic-pipeline` |
| Your Situation 你的狀況 | Recommended Mode | |----------------|-----------------| | Vague idea, need guidance / 有模糊想法,需要引導 | `socratic` | | Clear RQ, need comprehensive research / 有明確 RQ,需要完整研究 | `full` | | Need a quick brief (30 min) / 需要快速摘要 | `quick` | | Have a paper to evaluate before citing / 有論文需要評估 | `review` | | Need literature review for a topic / 需要文獻回顧 | `lit-review` | | Need to verify specific claims / 需要查核特定事實 | `fact-check` | | Need systematic review / meta-analysis / 系統性回顧或後設分析 | `systematic-review` |
Not sure? Start with `socratic` — it will help you figure out what you need. 不確定?先用 `socratic` 模式——它會幫你釐清你需要什麼。
---
| # | Agent | Role | Phase | |---|-------|------|-------| | 1 | `research_question_agent` | Transforms vague topics into precise, FINER-scored research questions with scope boundaries | Phase 1, Socratic Layer 1 | | 2 | `research_architect_agent` | Designs methodology blueprint: paradigm, method, data strategy, analytical framework, validity criteria | Phase 1 | | 3 | `bibliography_agent` | Systematic literature search, source screening, annotated bibliography in APA 7.0 | Phase 2 | | 4 | `source_verification_agent` | Fact-checking, source grading (evidence hierarchy), predatory journal detection, conflict-of-interest flagging | Phase 2 | | 5 | `synthesis_agent` | Cross-source integration, contradiction resolution, thematic synthesis, gap analysis | Phase 3 | | 6 | `report_compiler_agent` | Drafts complete APA 7.0 report (Title -> Abstract -> Intro -> Method -> Findings -> Discussion -> References) | Phase 4, 6 | | 7 | `editor_in_chief_agent` | Q1 journal editorial review: originality, rigor, evidence sufficiency, verdict (Accept/Revise/Reject) | Phase 5 | | 8 | `devils_advocate_agent` | Challenges assumptions, tests for logical fallacies, finds alternative explanations, confirmation bias checks | Phase 1, 3, 5, Socratic Layer 2, 4 | | 9 | `ethics_review_agent` | AI-assisted research ethics, attribution integrity, dual-use screening, fair representation | Phase 5 | | 10 | `s
## 🔥 力荐 · StatsPAI — Stata 与 R 的 Python 平替,为 AI Agent 而生 🔁 Stata / R 平替:reghdfe、csdid、rdrobust、synth、fixest、did 等常用命令在 Python 中一站式替代,一个 import statspai as sp 搞定 DID / RD / IV / SCM / DML / matching 🤖 面向 Agent 设计:结构化结果对象 + 内置 MCP Server,Claude / Codex
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy +…
Use when the user asks to run a full empirical / causal analysis in Python — by default in the style of an applied economics…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy +…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Stata ecosystem — native Stata + reghdfe + ivreg2 + csdid +…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the modern tidyverse + econometrics R ecosystem — dplyr + tidyr + haven +…
Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready…
Direct browser control via CDP for web interaction: automation, scraping, testing, screenshots, and site/app work. Also covers…
Browser automation CLI for AI agents. Use when the user needs to interact with websites, including navigating pages, filling…