research
Gather external knowledge the spec needs and distill it into §R — the durable research log — so build grounds in facts instead of hallucinating library behavior. Each finding cites a source; unsourced claims are flagged, never written as fact. Triggers when a spec decision hinges on a library/API/best practice the agent is unsure of, when the user says "research this", "what's the best lib for…", "check current best practice", or invokes /ck:research. Defers the §R write to the spec skill.
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/juliusbrussee/cavekit --skill researchresearch — external knowledge → §R
Every finding cites a source. No source → flag it ?, never write a guess as fact.
"Process without library context gives you well-organized hallucinations." Build invents a plausible-but-wrong API & §B fills with avoidable bugs. Research is the external oracle: pull the real fact once, log it caveman, never re-derive.
WHEN TO RESEARCH
- A §C/§I/§V decision hinges on a lib, API, version, or pattern you are unsure of.
- You are about to assume how an external dependency behaves.
- The idea touches a domain with real prior art (auth, payments, crypto, rate-limit).
/grillparked a?that the outside world must answer.
Skip when the build touches only code you already wrote. Research scales to the unknown, ⊥ to habit.
FOUR STEPS
1. SCOPE
Turn the unknown into 1-3 concrete questions. Vague "research auth" → "JWT lib for Node ESM, maintained?" + "refresh-token rotation: current best practice?". A scoped question gets a citable answer; a vague one gets an essay.
2. GATHER
Use web search / docs tools. Prefer primary sources: official docs, the repo, the RFC, the paper. Two independent sources beat one confident blog. For a big sweep, spawn a sub-agent so the raw pages never touch this context — it returns only the distilled finding + source.
3. DISTILL
Crush each answer to one caveman line + its source. Drop the prose. The §R row is the memory; the tab you read is not.
R3|refresh token|rotate on use, revoke family on reuse-detect|datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6819#section-5.2.2.3
4. HAND OFF
Emit the §R rows & hand to the spec skill to append. If a finding changes a constraint or interface, note the §C/§I edit for spec too. Research proposes; spec writes.
SOURCE DISCIPLINE
- Cite a URL, repo, RFC, or paper per row. Verbatim identifiers/versions.
- Could not verify → write the row but flag
?in the finding & say so. An unverified claim labeled honestly is fine; one disguised as fact is a future §B. - Conflicting sources → log both, let the user pick. ⊥ silently average them.
WHEN TO STOP
Done when every scoped question has a sourced §R row (or an honest ?), and no
build decision still rests on an unchecked assumption. ⊥ research past the
questions you scoped — that is just burning the attention budget.
BOUNDARIES
- ⊥ write SPEC.md. Hand §R rows to spec.
- ⊥ write a finding as fact without a source.
- ⊥ dump raw pages into context or §R. Distill or it does not land.
- ⊥ research what you can read in the repo. Local truth > web guess.