joenandez/spectre/spectre-research

research

Codebase research: spawn parallel read-only agents, synthesize their findings into one evidence-based document. Live code is the source of truth.

Inputs

• Research question / topic (from $ARGUMENTS). If absent, send an immediate reply asking for it and stop.
• Optional explicit managed feature name/root or an artifact beneath one.
• Any files the user names (tickets, docs, JSON).

Working set

• FEATURE_ROOT = .spectre/features/<feature-name>/, resolved from the input or chosen autonomously below. Read branch/commit/repo metadata via tool at write time, never inline earlier.
• Agents (read-only, run in parallel): @spectre:finder (where code lives), @spectre:analyst (how it works), @spectre:patterns (similar implementations), @spectre:web-research (3rd-party docs — instruct it to return LINKS). Context7 MCP only if the user explicitly asks for library docs.

Feature root contract

• Reuse a managed FEATURE_ROOT only when explicit/current-thread evidence ties it to this work (physical directory wins; never branch/recency/lifecycle/scans); distinct work ignores ambient roots. Otherwise, including on collision, standalone MUST first load and follow @skill-spectre:spectre-feature-root through DONE; orchestrated calls escalate. Keep writes beneath it and pass it unchanged.

Method / guardrails

1. Immediate reply first — acknowledge the topic and state the feature name/root the workflow will use (or ask for the topic) with NO tool calls in the opening turn.
2. Read named files fully in main context (no limit/offset) before decomposing.
3. Decompose the question into areas; track with TodoWrite. Strategy: locate → analyze promising hits → fan out parallel reads. Tell each agent what to find, not how to search.
4. Wait for ALL agents before synthesizing. Compress each return to a 1–2K summary; do not write per-agent scratch files.
5. Synthesize: prefer live-code findings as source of truth; connect findings across components; cite concrete path:line; answer the user's actual question with evidence.

Outputs + DONE

Write one research doc to {FEATURE_ROOT}/research/{topic}_{MMDDYY}.md; the research doc begins below its title with Feature: <feature-name> and Feature Root: .spectre/features/<feature-name>. DONE when:

• YAML frontmatter: date (ISO+tz), git_commit, branch, repository, topic, tags, status: complete, last_updated (YYYY-MM-DD), last_updated_by. Multi-word keys snake_case.
• Sections, in order: 1 Title # Research: {topic} · 2 Metadata header · 3 Research Question · 4 Summary · 5 Detailed Findings (by area, with file:line) · 6 Code References · 7 Architecture Insights · 8 Related Research · 9 Open Questions.
• Every claim is backed by a path:line reference; live code prioritized over docs.
• Permalinks: if on main/master OR the commit is pushed, replace local refs with https://github.com/{owner}/{repo}/blob/{commit}/{file}#L{line} (gh repo view --json owner,name); else keep local refs.
• A concise findings summary (with key file refs) is presented to the user.

Handoff

Follow-ups update the same doc (metadata + timestamped section); close with one next-step pointer: Plan with resolved research document path or further research.

Escalate-If

• The question is too broad/ambiguous to scope agents → ask one clarifying question before fanning out.
• Findings contradict each other or the live code can't be reached → surface the conflict in Open Questions rather than guessing.