research_methods v1.0.0

name: "research_methods" description: "Conduct rigorous research: distinguish primary vs secondary vs tertiary sources, evaluate evidence quality with a structured rubric, chain citations to foundations, and cite correctly. Use when answering factual questions, writing research briefs, drafting papers, or verifying claims." metadata: { "includeInPrompt": true }

Research Methods

Purpose

Give an agent the working habits of a competent researcher: find evidence, weigh it, cite it, and be honest about what remains unverified. Use whenever a task needs facts it can stand behind — research briefs, literature reviews, due-diligence, technical investigations, academic writing.

Workflow

1. Frame the question

Write one sentence: the exact claim or question to answer. Split multi-part questions into separate claims — each gets its own evidence, not one blended answer.

2. Collect sources (lateral reading first)

• Prefer primary sources: the original study, dataset, filing, statute, official docs, raw measurements, first-person account. Secondary sources (news reporting on a study, biographies, reviews) are one step removed; tertiary (encyclopedias, Wikipedia, handbooks) are maps to sources, never citations.
• Lateral reading: when weighting source X, search the publisher/author independently — don't trust their self-description.
• Never treat ten re-summaries of one press release as ten sources. Diversity of source type beats diversity of source count.
• For any claim that drives a decision, get two genuinely independent sources (syndicated copies and sources relying on the same material do not count). One authoritative source suffices for background.

3. Evaluate each source

Run the CRAAP rubric (librarians at CSU Chico, 2004) — score each criterion 0–3: Currency · Relevance · Authority · Accuracy · Purpose. Total ≥ 11: high confidence · 7–10: moderate · ≤ 6: skepticism. See references/source-rubric.md for the full worksheet, red flags, and the source-quality ladder.

4. Chain citations

Trace references 2–3 levels deep: L1 = directly relevant sources, L2 = the foundational work they build on, L3 = intellectual context. If every L2 source cites the same L3 paper, that paper is probably foundational — read it. When a secondary source makes the key claim, follow its citations back to the primary when possible.

5. Keep a source trail

Log every source that carries weight: id, type (primary/secondary/tertiary), author or publisher, date, URL/locator, claims it supports, its limitations. Template in references/source-ledger-template.md. A source mentioned only in a trailing list without being referenced in the body is not a citation.

6. Cite correctly

• Cite when: quoting, paraphrasing or summarizing, stating anything highly debatable, using data/images/procedures/opinions not your own.
• Common knowledge (what an educated person would know, could observe, or readily find in a textbook/encyclopedia) usually needs no citation — but it's context-dependent. When in doubt, cite.
• If you cannot find the source your data came from, do not use the data.
• Match the requested style (APA, MLA, Chicago) or default to: Author. (Year). Title. Publisher. URL.
• Distinguish source statement from your inference. Label inference explicitly: Inference: …

7. Write the answer

Lead with the answer, then the evidence. If credible sources conflict, report the conflict and explain the difference — never silently pick one. Close with a ## Sources section: one fetched source per line, N. Title. Every listed URL must have been actually retrieved this turn.

Output Contract

• The question answered in one sentence, up front.
• Findings with per-claim attribution (source + date where time-sensitive).
• Explicit flags for conflicts, inference vs. statement, and evidence gaps.
• ## Sources list: only sources retrieved this turn, one per line.
• The source trail/ledger preserved in the working directory.

Operating Rules

1. Every factual claim must be verified via web search or a primary source. Never invent numbers, dates, quotes, or events. Unverifiable = cut it or frame as opinion. No confident unverified claims, ever.
2. When retrieval fails or a fact cannot be verified, say so. A stated evidence gap is better than a confident guess.
3. Weight advocacy sources by their stake in the answer; a trade association's report on its own industry's product needs corroboration from a non-aligned source.
4. Prefer primary sources over aggregators, SEO content, or AI-generated summaries — those are leads only.
5. Answer the actual question asked. Don't turn a focused research request into a broad survey unless the extra material directly helps answer it.
6. For time-sensitive facts (prices, versions, laws, schedules), record the publication/access date with the claim.
7. Never self-plagiarize across papers and never submit one piece of work for two purposes without disclosure.

References

• references/source-rubric.md — CRAAP worksheet, red flags, source-quality ladder.
• references/source-ledger-template.md — copy-paste ledger template + worked example.
• references/citation-checklist.md — what-to-cite / what-not-to-cite rules per style-guide conventions.