Install
$ agentstack add skill-christopheralphonse-calphonse-skills-plan-research ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Plan Research
Research implementation approach before planning or coding. Produces RESEARCH.md (or an equivalent research artifact) that downstream planning skills consume.
Guardrails
- Start by narrowing the research question and success criteria.
- Prefer primary sources and local code evidence over broad surveys.
- Label uncertainty, version risk, and assumptions.
- Do not produce implementation plans or code unless explicitly asked.
When to use
- Research without planning yet
- Re-research after planning is complete
- Investigate feasibility before committing to a phase
- Ad-hoc research for a topic not yet tied to a roadmap phase (write under
.planning/research/)
For full planning flows, use /plan instead.
Process
1. Resolve scope
- Phase number (e.g.
3,2.1): locate.planning/phases/*/matching the phase; readROADMAP.md, phaseCONTEXT.md,REQUIREMENTS.md, and.planning/PROJECT.mdif present. - Topic string (e.g. "local build and test workflow"): treat as a research brief; write to
.planning/research//RESEARCH.md(create directories as needed).
If neither a valid phase nor a clear topic is provided, ask one clarifying question.
2. Check existing research
If RESEARCH.md already exists at the target path, offer:
- Update research
- View existing (print path + summary; do not overwrite)
- Skip
Wait for the user's choice unless they passed an explicit force-refresh intent.
3. Gather context (paths only in orchestrator)
Load by reference; do not paste large files into the orchestrator message:
- Requirements and project state under
.planning/ - Phase
CONTEXT.mdwhen researching a phase - Relevant codebase areas (build config, CI, package manifests, etc.)
Summarize what the researcher will read before spawning.
4. Spawn researcher subagent
Use Task with subagent_type="explore" or generalPurpose and a fresh context budget. Research burns tokens fast (docs, web, verification).
Research modes: ecosystem (default), feasibility, implementation, comparison.
Phase/topic research — how to implement this well, not just which library to pick.
The question is: "What do I not know that I don't know?"
Discover:
- Established architecture patterns for this domain
- Standard stack and versions
- Common pitfalls and failure modes
- SOTA vs training-data assumptions
- What must NOT be hand-rolled
RESEARCH.md sections should be prescriptive where planning will consume them:
- ## Standard Stack
- ## Architecture Patterns
- ## Don't Hand-Roll
- ## Common Pitfalls
- ## Code Examples (when useful)
Use "Use X" not "Consider X or Y" for decisions planning must take.
- [ ] All relevant domains investigated
- [ ] Critical claims verified against official docs
- [ ] Confidence levels stated honestly
- [ ] Section names match what plan and review skills expect
Write RESEARCH.md to the resolved path.
End with ## RESEARCH COMPLETE and a 5–10 line summary.
5. Handle subagent return
| Marker | Action | | --- | --- | | ## RESEARCH COMPLETE | Show summary; offer /plan, dig deeper, review full, done | | ## CHECKPOINT REACHED | Present checkpoint; get user response; spawn continuation with prior RESEARCH.md | | ## RESEARCH INCONCLUSIVE | Show attempts; offer more context, different mode, or manual follow-up |
6. Continuation
If the user continues after a checkpoint, spawn again with ` pointing at the existing RESEARCH.md` and the user's checkpoint response.
Operating rules
- Research-only: do not write
PLAN.mdor implementation code unless the user explicitly asks. - Prefer subagents for investigation; keep the orchestrator lean.
- Durable outputs live under
.planning/only.
Success criteria
- [ ] Scope resolved (phase or topic + output path)
- [ ] Existing research handled (prompt, view, or skip)
- [ ] Researcher spawned with correct context
- [ ]
RESEARCH.mdwritten or viewed as requested - [ ] User knows next step (plan, deeper research, or stop)
> Install: `npx skills add ChristopherAlphonse/calphonse-skills --skill plan-research`
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: ChristopherAlphonse
- Source: ChristopherAlphonse/calphonse-skills
- License: MIT
- Homepage: https://www.skills.sh/christopheralphonse/calphonse-skills
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.