/ulw-research

name: "ulw-research"
description: "[omh] Deep dive before a decision: deep research engine - grounding for specs and decisions: study open-source reference implementations with pinned refs, gather live web evidence with citation discipline, verify contested claims, and distill a decision-grounding dossier that planning consumes; for a decision brief use research-brief, for upstream guidance use web-research. Use when the user says: research plan, literature review, research literature, review recent papers, deep research, deep-research, exhaustive research, saturation research."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, research]
    category: research
    phase: decision-grounding
    role: researcher
    quality_tier: source-gated

Research

This is a Hermes-native `research` workflow skill.

Why This Exists

`research` exists to make Hermes a careful research engine: it routes research demands to source-backed evidence gathering - from live web citations to studied reference implementations - verifies contested claims, and distills decision-grounding output so planning starts from evidence instead of guesses.

Do Not Use When

• The user asks for a full plan-to-PR delivery cycle; use `ultrawork` (its `delivery_boundary` capability) or a planning workflow after research instead.
• The request is purely local repo inspection with no external, current, citation, or source-comparison need.
• The study target is this repository itself rather than external references; use `codebase-onboarding`.
• The user needs coding execution, review, CI, or merge evidence rather than research synthesis.
• The requested output is a typed candidate list or acquisition status without factual synthesis; use `source-finder`.
• The user needs a market, customer, or pricing decision brief with evidence-versus-inference treatment; use `research-brief`.
• The user asks for recurring monitoring, a source inbox, or Scout/Analyst/Briefer operations; use `research-department`.
• One cited retrieval round settles the question and no reference implementation needs reading; use `web-research`.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: 딥리서치로 다른 오픈소스 구현들을 깊게 보고 스펙 잡기 전에 근거를 만들어줘.
• Expected behavior: Run the Hermes research lane at depth: decompose axes, study the most relevant reference implementations with pinned refs, verify contested claims, then distill a decision-grounding dossier for the planning step.
• Why: The user explicitly asked for deep pre-spec grounding built on other open-source implementations.

Bad example:

• Prompt: 이 레포 코드 구조만 파악해줘.
• Expected behavior: Route to `codebase-onboarding` because the study target is this repository, not external sources or reference implementations.
• Why: Local repo orientation needs no external evidence gathering or claim verification.

Completion Checklist

• The research question, source boundaries, recency assumptions, and confidence level are named.
• Observed sources, inference, synthesis, and unresolved retrieval gaps are separated.
• Follow-up planning or handoff uses the research summary without calling it execution evidence.

Recovery Notes

• If a source fails with HTTP 403, HTTP 429, a paywall, or a WAF or bot wall, load Hermes' `blocked-page-recovery` skill once for that source when it is available and never retry the same URL in a loop; cite an archive or cached copy it returns as a dated historical capture, never as the live page. If the skill is unavailable, recovery fails, the retrieval budget is spent, or the source needs a login or payment, name the retrieval gap with that reason. Record each blocked source as one `research_source_recovery/v1`.
• If web or repository access is unavailable, name the retrieval gap and use only observed local context instead of inventing findings.
• If no archive access exists or the capture provider's paid authority is exhausted, record a temporal retrieval gap with no network action and keep the as-of claim in the annex; never substitute the current page for it.
• If the evidence stays thin or contested, lower the stated confidence and keep the unresolved claims in the annex rather than flattening them.
• If leads keep expanding past the declared budget, stop, record open leads in the dossier, and ask whether to extend the budget.
• If enough evidence already exists and the real request is planning, hand off to ralplan with the recorded dossier.
• If the audience answer arrives after retrieval started, keep the evidence and re-render rather than re-running: the dossier feeds both branches.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: **Research and company ops** (`product-docs`, `source-finder`, `web-research`, `research`, `model-optimization`, `inference-serving`, `model-finetuning`, `research-brief`, `+20 more`) - research, signals, ops, and briefings.
• If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
• Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.

Use When

Use for research before planning, deciding, or handoff - from current web evidence and citations to exhaustive grounding with studied reference implementations and verified contested claims.

Strong routing signals: `research plan`, `literature review`, `research literature`, `review recent papers`, `deep research`, `deep-research`, `exhaustive research`, `saturation research`, `pre-spec research`, `research before spec`, `research before planning`, `reference implementation`, `reference implementations`, `reference implementation study`, `prior art`, `prior art research`, `study existing implementations`, `comparable implementations`, `compare open source implementations`, `decision-grounding research`, `autoresearch-goal`, `research goal`, `durable research`, `critic research`, `ディープリサーチ`, `深く調査`, `出典付きで調査`, `OSS実装を調査`, `조사`, `근거`, `고객 피드백`, `문헌 검토`, `논문들 검토`, `딥리서치`, `딥 리서치`, `심층 리서치`, `레퍼런스 구현`, `오픈소스 깊게 참고`, `深度调研`, `深入调研`,