research-ops
Evidence-first current-state research workflow for ECC. Use when the user wants fresh facts, comparisons, enrichment, or a recommendation built from current public evidence and any supplied local context.
By affaan-m · 2,872 installs
npx skills add affaan-m/ecc --skill research-ops
Source repository · Upstream listing
Research Ops
Use this when the user asks to research something current, compare options, enrich people or companies, or turn repeated lookups into a monitored workflow.
This is the operator wrapper around the repo's research stack. It is not a replacement for deep research , exa search , or market research ; it tells you when and how to use them together.
Skill Stack
Pull these ECC native skills into the workflow when relevant:
exa search for fast current web discovery
deep research for multi source synthesis with citations
market research when the end result should be a recommendation or ranked decision
lead intelligence when the task is people/company targeting instead of generic research
knowledge ops when the result should be stored in durable context afterward
When to Use
user says "research", "look up", "compare", "who should I talk to", or "what's the latest"
the answer depends on current public information
the user already supplied evidence and wants it factored into a fresh recommendation
the task may be recurring enough that it should become a monitor instead of a one off lookup
Guardrails
do not answer current questions from stale memory when fresh search is cheap
separate:
sourced fact
user provided evidence
inference
recommendation
do not spin up a heavyweight research pass if the answer is already in local code or docs
Workflow
1. Start from what the user already gave you
Normalize any supplied material into:
already evidenced facts
needs verification
open questions
Do not restart the analysis from zero if the user already built part of the model.
2. Classify the ask
Choose the right lane before searching:
quick factual answer
comparison or decision memo
lead/enrichment pass
recurring monitoring candidate
3. Take the lightest useful evidence path first
use exa search for fast discovery
escalate to deep research when synthesis or multiple sources matter
use market research when the outcome should end in a recommendation
hand off to lead intelligence when the real ask is target ranking or warm path discovery
4. Report with explicit evidence boundaries
For important claims, say whether they are:
sourced facts
user supplied context
inference
recommendation
Freshness sensitive answers should include concrete dates.
5. Decide whether the task should stay manual
If the user is likely to ask the same research question repeatedly, say so explicitly and recommend a monitoring or workflow layer instead of repeating the same manual search forever.
Output Format
Pitfalls
do not mix inference into sourced facts without labeling it
do not ignore user provided evidence
do not use a heavy research lane for a question local repo context can answer
do not give freshness sensitive answers without dates
Verification
important claims are labeled by evidence type
freshness sensitive outputs include dates
the final recommendation matches the actual research mode used