AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Deep Recon

skill-lucface-claude-skills-deep-recon · by Lucface

Multi-agent research swarm that finds existing solutions before you write a single line of code. Prevents reinventing the wheel.

No reviews yet
0 installs
6 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-lucface-claude-skills-deep-recon

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No 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.

Are you the author of Deep Recon? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Deep Recon

Research swarm that scours the internet for existing solutions before you build anything.

Time budget: 10 min total. Abort if no useful results after 5 min of searching.

When to Use

  • Before building anything non-trivial
  • When brainstorming identifies a hard problem
  • When you suspect the problem has been solved before
  • Before writing an implementation plan
  • When evaluating build vs buy decisions

Quick Start

/recon [problem description]

Examples:
/recon real-time collaborative editing for a web app
/recon email deliverability monitoring system
/recon AI agent orchestration with tool use

The problem description is passed as $ARGUMENTS. If empty, ask the user what to research.

The Process

Phase 1: Decompose (Lead Agent)

Parse $ARGUMENTS into 3-5 searchable questions. Also identify:

  • Domain: What field is this in?
  • Frameworks: What tech stack constraints exist?
  • Core challenge: What's the hard part?

Phase 2: Dispatch Research Agents (parallel)

Launch 3 agents in parallel using the Task tool with subagent_type: "general-purpose" and model: "sonnet".

Agent 1 — Solution Scout: Find packages, repos, and services.

  • WebSearch for "[problem] library [framework]", "[problem] open source github", "[problem] SaaS API"
  • WebFetch top results for details (stars, last commit, license)
  • Output: Ranked list with name, URL, pros/cons, maintenance status

Agent 2 — Community Intel: Find real developer discussions.

  • WebSearch targeting reddit.com, news.ycombinator.com, stackoverflow
  • WebFetch top 3-5 threads for detailed reading
  • Output: Community consensus, pitfalls, "I wish I'd known" quotes

Agent 3 — Doc Collector: Find docs, tutorials, educational content.

  • WebSearch for "[solution] docs", "[problem] tutorial [year]", "[problem] best practices"
  • WebFetch top doc pages for summaries
  • Output: Curated links ranked as must-read / useful / deep-dive

Phase 3: Code Analyzer (sequential, after Phase 2)

This runs AFTER Phase 2 because it needs Solution Scout results as input.

Launch one agent (sonnet) to analyze the top 2-3 solutions found:

  • Use WebFetch on GitHub repos to read READMEs and key source files
  • Use WebSearch for "[package] architecture" or "[package] how it works"
  • Report: Architecture pattern, key abstractions, how they handle the core challenge, adoptable patterns

Phase 4: Synthesize (Lead Agent)

Merge all agent outputs into a research brief using the template at templates/research-brief.md.

Save to: /research/YYYY-MM-DD-[topic]/research-brief.md

Be opinionated — recommend ONE approach and defend it with evidence.

Phase 5: Feed into Planning

The research brief becomes input for writing-plans:

  • Package solves 80%+ → recommend using it
  • No good solution → plan includes key patterns from research
  • Open questions → items to resolve during planning

Error Handling

  • No search results: Broaden terms, drop framework constraint, try synonym. After 2 empty rounds, note gap and move on.
  • Agent returns garbage: Discard, note in brief as "insufficient data for [area]".
  • Problem too broad: Split into sub-problems, recon each separately (max 2 splits).
  • All solutions are bad: That's a valid finding. Brief should say "build from scratch" with rationale.

Success Criteria

  • [ ] At least 3 existing solutions evaluated (or documented why fewer exist)
  • [ ] Community sentiment captured
  • [ ] Recommended approach with justification
  • [ ] Research brief saved to artifacts
  • [ ] Open questions identified

Integration Points

| Skill | Relationship | |-------|-------------| | brainstorming | Triggers recon for non-trivial problems | | writing-plans | Receives research brief as input | | app-teardown | Code Analyzer can use teardown methods for deep analysis | | package-research | Solution Scout can delegate to this for npm/pypi specifics | | compound | Analysis phase triggers recon when needed |

Model Routing

  • Lead agent (decompose + synthesize): opus
  • Solution Scout / Community Intel / Doc Collector: sonnet
  • Code Analyzer: sonnet

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.