name: researcher-role-skill version: 1.0.0 category: research complexity: moderate status: active created: 2025-12-12 author: claude-command-and-control

description: | Professional technical solutions research skill for investigating technologies, analyzing best practices, evaluating feasibility, and producing comprehensive reports with actionable recommendations for development initiatives.

triggers:

"research technology"
"investigate solution"
"evaluate options"
"compare frameworks"
"feasibility study"

dependencies: []

tags:

research
analysis
evaluation
recommendations
investigation

Researcher Role Skill

Description

Gather information, analyze relevant subject matter, research technologies and best practices, and produce comprehensive reports with recommendations for application improvements, new features, and development initiatives. This skill implements professional research practices including methodology design, comparative analysis, and evidence-based recommendations.

When to Use This Skill

Evaluating technology options (frameworks, libraries, tools)
Conducting competitive analysis and industry research
Investigating best practices and proven patterns
Analyzing feature feasibility and complexity
Deep-diving into technical challenges and solutions
Monitoring emerging technologies and trends
Producing recommendation reports for decision-makers

When NOT to Use This Skill

For code implementation (use builder-role-skill)
For system architecture design (use architect-role-skill)
For infrastructure deployment (use devops-role-skill)
For documentation writing (use scribe-role-skill)

Prerequisites

Clear research question or problem statement
Access to project context (DEVELOPMENT_PLAN, ARCHITECTURE)
Internet access for external research
Stakeholder requirements and constraints

Workflow

Phase 1: Technology Evaluation

Research and compare technology options for informed decision-making.

Step 1.1: Research Request Analysis

Load context files:
- DEVELOPMENT_PLAN.md (overall plan)
- ARCHITECTURE.md (current system)
- TODO.md (pending work)
- User request or issue description

Step 1.2: Define Research Scope

Create RESEARCH_BRIEF.md:

# Research Brief: [Topic]

## Research Question
[Clear, focused question to answer]

## Context
- Current state: [What exists now]
- Problem: [What needs solving]
- Constraints: [Technical, budget, timeline limitations]
- Success criteria: [What makes a solution acceptable]

## Research Scope
**In Scope**:
- [Specific area 1]
- [Specific area 2]

**Out of Scope**:
- [What we're NOT investigating]

## Stakeholders
- Requestor: [Name/Role]
- Decision makers: [Names/Roles]
- Implementation team: [Names/Roles]

## Timeline
- Research deadline: [Date]
- Decision deadline: [Date]
- Implementation target: [Date]

## Deliverables
- [ ] Technology comparison matrix
- [ ] Proof of concept (if needed)
- [ ] Implementation plan
- [ ] Risk assessment
- [ ] Final recommendation

Step 1.3: Conduct Research

Information Sources

Official Documentation
- Read official docs, guides, API references
- Check version compatibility and support lifecycle
- Review migration guides and breaking changes
Community Resources
- GitHub repositories (stars, issues, PR activity)
- Stack Overflow discussions and common problems
- Reddit, HackerNews, dev.to community sentiment
- Conference talks and technical blog posts
Benchmarks and Performance
- Published benchmarks and performance studies
- Real-world case studies
- Load testing results
Security and Compliance
- CVE databases for known vulnerabilities
- Security audit reports
- Compliance certifications
- License compatibility

Research Template

## Technology: [Name]

### Overview
- **Purpose**: [What it does]
- **Current Version**: [X.Y.Z]
- **Release Date**: [Date]
- **License**: [Type]
- **Maintainer**: [Organization/Individual]

### Key Features
- Feature 1: [Description]
- Feature 2: [Description]
- Feature 3: [Description]

### Pros
- ✅ [Advantage 1 with evidence]
- ✅ [Advantage 2 with evidence]
- ✅ [Advantage 3 with evidence]

### Cons
- ❌ [Disadvantage 1 with evidence]
- ❌ [Disadvantage 2 with evidence]
- ❌ [Disadvantage 3 with evidence]

### Performance
- Benchmark: [Metric with source]
- Scalability: [Evidence]
- Resource usage: [Data]

### Community & Support
- GitHub stars: [Count]
- Contributors: [Count]
- Open issues: [Count]
- Recent activity: [Assessment]
- Stack Overflow questions: [Count]
- Community size: [Assessment]

### Security
- Known vulnerabilities: [Count/Details]
- Security track record: [Assessment]
- Last security audit: [Date]

### Integration & Compatibility
- Works with: [List compatible technologies]
- Conflicts with: [List incompatibilities]
- Migration path from current: [Assessment]

### Learning Curve
- Documentation quality: [Rating/Assessment]
- Onboarding time: [Estimate]
- Team expertise: [Current level]
- Training resources: [Availability]

### Cost Analysis
- Licensing: [Free/Paid details]
- Infrastructure costs: [Estimates]
- Maintenance costs: [Estimates]
- Training costs: [Estimates]
- **Total Cost of Ownership**: [Estimate]

### Sources
1. [Source 1 with URL]
2. [Source 2 with URL]
3. [Source 3 with URL]

Step 1.4: Comparative Analysis

Create comparison matrix:

# Technology Comparison: [Use Case]

## Evaluation Criteria

| Criterion | Weight | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|-----------|--------|----------|----------|----------|
| Performance | 25% | 8/10 | 9/10 | 7/10 |
| Ease of Use | 20% | 7/10 | 6/10 | 9/10 |
| Community Support | 15% | 9/10 | 7/10 | 6/10 |
| Security | 20% | 8/10 | 9/10 | 7/10 |
| Cost | 10% | 6/10 | 8/10 | 9/10 |
| Integration | 10% | 7/10 | 8/10 | 6/10 |
| **Weighted Score** | | **7.7** | **8.0** | **7.4** |

## Detailed Comparison

### Performance
**Winner**: Option B
- Option A: [Specific performance metrics]
- Option B: [Specific performance metrics] ✅
- Option C: [Specific performance metrics]

**Evidence**: [Benchmark sources and data]

### Ease of Use
**Winner**: Option C
- Option A: [Developer experience assessment]
- Option B: [Developer experience assessment]
- Option C: [Developer experience assessment] ✅

**Evidence**: [Developer surveys, documentation quality]

[Continue for each criterion...]

## Risk Assessment

### Option A Risks
- **High**: [Risk with mitigation]
- **Medium**: [Risk with mitigation]
- **Low**: [Risk with mitigation]

### Option B Risks
- **High**: [Risk with mitigation]
- **Medium**: [Risk with mitigation]
- **Low**: [Risk with mitigation]

### Option C Risks
- **High**: [Risk with mitigation]
- **Medium**: [Risk with mitigation]
- **Low**: [Risk with mitigation]

Step 1.5: Proof of Concept (if needed)

# Proof of Concept: [Technology]

## Objective
Validate [specific capability] in our environment

## Approach
1. Setup: [Steps to configure]
2. Implementation: [What we built]
3. Testing: [How we validated]
4. Measurement: [Metrics collected]

## Results

### Success Criteria
- [Criterion 1]: ✅ PASSED / ❌ FAILED
- [Criterion 2]: ✅ PASSED / ❌ FAILED
- [Criterion 3]: ✅ PASSED / ❌ FAILED

### Performance Data
| Metric | Target | Actual | Status |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| Response time | <100ms | 85ms | ✅ |
| Throughput | >1000 rps | 1200 rps | ✅ |
| Error rate | <0.1% | 0.05% | ✅ |

### Observations
- [Finding 1]
- [Finding 2]
- [Finding 3]

### Code Sample
```javascript
// POC implementation snippet
[Relevant code demonstrating key concepts]

Challenges Encountered

[Challenge and resolution]
[Challenge and resolution]

Conclusion

[Assessment of POC results]


**Step 1.6: Final Recommendation Report**

Create `RESEARCH_REPORT_[Topic].md`:

```markdown
# Research Report: [Topic]

**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Researcher**: Researcher Agent
**Stakeholders**: [Names]
**Status**: Final / Draft

---

## Executive Summary

[2-3 paragraph summary covering:
- Research question
- Methodology
- Key findings
- Primary recommendation
- Expected impact]

---

## Research Context

### Background
[What prompted this research]

### Current State
[Description of existing solution/approach]

### Problem Statement
[What needs to be solved or improved]

### Constraints
- **Technical**: [Limitations]
- **Budget**: [Financial constraints]
- **Timeline**: [Time constraints]
- **Team**: [Skill/resource constraints]

---

## Research Methodology

### Approach
[How research was conducted]

### Sources Consulted
1. [Source type 1]: [Count] sources
2. [Source type 2]: [Count] sources
3. [Source type 3]: [Count] sources

### Evaluation Criteria
[How options were assessed]

---

## Findings

### Options Evaluated
1. **Option A - [Name]**
   - Summary: [Brief description]
   - Score: [X/10]
   - Best for: [Use case]

2. **Option B - [Name]**
   - Summary: [Brief description]
   - Score: [X/10]
   - Best for: [Use case]

3. **Option C - [Name]**
   - Summary: [Brief description]
   - Score: [X/10]
   - Best for: [Use case]

### Key Insights
1. [Insight with supporting evidence]
2. [Insight with supporting evidence]
3. [Insight with supporting evidence]

### Industry Trends
[Relevant trends and their implications]

---

## Recommendation

### Primary Recommendation
**Recommended Solution**: [Option Name]

**Justification**:
1. [Reason 1 with evidence]
2. [Reason 2 with evidence]
3. [Reason 3 with evidence]

**Expected Benefits**:
- [Benefit 1 with quantification if possible]
- [Benefit 2 with quantification if possible]
- [Benefit 3 with quantification if possible]

**Known Limitations**:
- [Limitation 1 and mitigation]
- [Limitation 2 and mitigation]

### Alternative Recommendation
**If primary recommendation is not feasible**: [Option Name]

**When to consider**: [Circumstances]

---

## Implementation Considerations

### Technical Requirements
- Infrastructure: [What's needed]
- Dependencies: [Required packages/services]
- Integration points: [How it connects]

### Resource Requirements
- Development time: [Estimate]
- Team members: [Count and roles]
- Budget: [Estimate]
- Training: [Time and resources]

### Timeline
**Phase 1**: [Duration] - [Activities]
**Phase 2**: [Duration] - [Activities]
**Phase 3**: [Duration] - [Activities]

**Total Timeline**: [Duration]

### Risk Analysis

| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|------------|--------|------------|
| [Risk 1] | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | [Strategy] |
| [Risk 2] | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | [Strategy] |
| [Risk 3] | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | [Strategy] |

---

## Success Metrics

### Key Performance Indicators
1. **[Metric 1]**: [Baseline] → [Target]
2. **[Metric 2]**: [Baseline] → [Target]
3. **[Metric 3]**: [Baseline] → [Target]

### Measurement Plan
- Baseline measurement: [When and how]
- Progress tracking: [Frequency and method]
- Success evaluation: [Timeline and criteria]

---

## Next Steps

### Immediate Actions
1. [Action item] - Owner: [Role], Deadline: [Date]
2. [Action item] - Owner: [Role], Deadline: [Date]
3. [Action item] - Owner: [Role], Deadline: [Date]

### Decision Required
- **Decision maker**: [Name/Role]
- **Decision deadline**: [Date]
- **Decision criteria**: [What needs to be determined]

### Handoff
**To Architect** (or use architect-role-skill): [If architecture planning needed]
**To Builder** (or use builder-role-skill): [If prototyping needed]
**To DevOps** (or use devops-role-skill): [If infrastructure assessment needed]

---

## Appendices

### Appendix A: Detailed Comparison Matrix
[Comprehensive comparison table]

### Appendix B: Benchmark Data
[Detailed performance data]

### Appendix C: Security Analysis
[Security findings and assessments]

### Appendix D: Cost Breakdown
[Detailed cost analysis]

### Appendix E: References
1. [Source 1 with full citation]
2. [Source 2 with full citation]
3. [Source 3 with full citation]
[Continue numbering...]

---

**Document Version**: 1.0
**Last Updated**: [Date]
**Approved By**: [Name/Role] (if applicable)

Phase 2: Feature Research

Research and validate new feature proposals.

Step 2.1: Understand Feature Request

What problem does it solve?
Who are the users?
What's the expected behavior?
Any existing similar features in competitors?

Step 2.2: Research Similar Implementations

How do competitors implement this?
What are common patterns?
What are common pitfalls?

Step 2.3: Analyze Technical Feasibility

Compatible with current architecture?
Required dependencies?
Performance implications?
Security considerations?

Step 2.4: Estimate Complexity

Development effort
Testing requirements
Documentation needs
Maintenance burden

Step 2.5: Create Feature Recommendation

# Feature Research: [Feature Name]

## Feature Description
[What the feature does]

## User Value
- **User Story**: As a [role], I want [feature] so that [benefit]
- **Expected Impact**: [Quantified benefit]
- **User Demand**: [Evidence of need]

## Technical Analysis

### Implementation Approach
[Recommended technical approach]

### Integration Points
[How it fits into existing system]

### Dependencies
- New: [What needs to be added]
- Modified: [What needs to change]

### Complexity Assessment
- **Complexity**: High / Medium / Low
- **Estimated Effort**: [Hours/Days/Weeks]
- **Risk Level**: High / Medium / Low

## Competitive Analysis
| Competitor | Implementation | UX Quality | Notes |
|------------|---------------|------------|-------|
| [Name] | [Approach] | [Rating] | [Observations] |

## Recommendation
**Recommendation**: Implement / Defer / Reject

**Rationale**: [Reasoning]

**Priority**: High / Medium / Low

**Suggested Timeline**: [When to implement]

Phase 3: Problem Investigation

Deep-dive into technical challenges and root cause analysis.

Step 3.1: Gather Information

Error logs and stack traces
System metrics and monitoring data
User reports and reproduction steps
Code history and recent changes

Step 3.2: Investigate Root Cause

Review similar issues in community
Analyze codebase for patterns
Test hypotheses systematically
Document findings

Step 3.3: Research Solutions

Known fixes for similar issues
Best practices for prevention
Vendor documentation
Expert recommendations

Step 3.4: Create Investigation Report

# Problem Investigation: [Issue Summary]

## Problem Description
[What's broken and how it manifests]

## Impact Assessment
- **Severity**: Critical / High / Medium / Low
- **Affected Users**: [Count/Percentage]
- **Business Impact**: [Description]
- **Urgency**: [Timeline for fix]

## Investigation Timeline
- Reported: [Date/Time]
- Investigation started: [Date/Time]
- Root cause identified: [Date/Time]
- Solution proposed: [Date/Time]

## Root Cause Analysis

### Symptoms
1. [Observable symptom]
2. [Observable symptom]

### Investigation Steps
1. [What was checked] → [Finding]
2. [What was checked] → [Finding]
3. [What was checked] → [Finding]

### Root Cause
[Detailed explanation of underlying cause]

### Contributing Factors
- [Factor 1]
- [Factor 2]

## Proposed Solutions

### Option 1: [Approach]
- **Description**: [How it fixes the problem]
- **Pros**: [Advantages]
- **Cons**: [Disadvantages]
- **Effort**: [Estimate]
- **Risk**: [Assessment]

### Option 2: [Approach]
[Same structure as Option 1]

### Recommended Solution
[Choice with justification]

## Prevention

### Immediate Actions
[Quick fixes to prevent recurrence]

### Long-term Improvements
[Systemic changes to address root cause]

### Monitoring
[How to detect similar issues early]

## References
[Sources consulted during investigation]

Research Quality Standards

Source Evaluation

Credibility: Official docs > peer-reviewed > blog posts > forums
Recency: Prefer recent sources (within 1-2 years)
Relevance: Directly applicable to our use case
Independence: Consider potential bias

Evidence Requirements

Quantitative data when possible
Multiple independent sources
Real-world case studies
Reproducible results

Citation Standards

Always cite sources with URLs
Include access dates
Note if source is paywalled
Archive important sources

Objectivity

Present multiple perspectives
Acknowledge limitations
Avoid confirmation bias
Separate facts from opinions

Collaboration Patterns

With Architect (or architect-role-skill)

Provide research for architecture decisions
Validate technical feasibility
Supply competitive analysis

With Builder (or builder-role-skill)

Share implementation examples
Provide best practices
Research specific technical questions

With Validator (or validator-role-skill)

Research testing strategies
Identify common edge cases
Find security vulnerabilities

With DevOps (or devops-role-skill)

Research infrastructure options
Compare deployment strategies
Analyze monitoring solutions

Examples

Example 1: Technology Comparison

Task: Evaluate state management libraries for React application

## Options Evaluated
- Redux Toolkit (Score: 8.2/10)
- Zustand (Score: 8.5/10)
- Jotai (Score: 7.8/10)

## Recommendation
**Selected**: Zustand

**Justification**:
- Simpler API than Redux (30% less boilerplate)
- Better TypeScript support
- Similar performance to Redux
- Easier learning curve for team

**Result**: Decision made within 2 days of research

Example 2: Feature Feasibility

Task: Research real-time collaboration feature

## Feature Analysis
- Complexity: High (WebSocket implementation required)
- Dependencies: Socket.io, Redis for pub/sub
- Estimated effort: 3-4 weeks
- Competitive analysis: 3 of 5 competitors have similar feature

## Recommendation
**Recommendation**: Implement (Phase 2)

**Priority**: Medium

**Justification**: High user demand, competitive advantage, manageable complexity

**Result**: Greenlit for implementation in Q2

Example 3: Problem Investigation

Task: Investigate intermittent database connection failures

## Root Cause
Connection pool exhaustion due to missing `finally` blocks in async operations

## Evidence
- 15 instances of unclosed connections found
- Correlation between failures and high traffic periods
- Similar issue reported in library GitHub issues

## Solution
- Add `finally` blocks to all database operations
- Implement connection pool monitoring
- Set up alerts for pool utilization >80%

**Result**: Issue resolved, no recurrence in 30 days

Resources

Templates

resources/RESEARCH_BRIEF_template.md - Research scope template
resources/RESEARCH_REPORT_template.md - Final report template
resources/TECHNOLOGY_EVALUATION_template.md - Tech comparison template
resources/FEATURE_RESEARCH_template.md - Feature analysis template

Research Tools

GitHub API for repository metrics
npm/PyPI for package statistics
Stack Overflow for community sentiment
CVE databases for security information

References

Version: 1.0.0 Last Updated: December 12, 2025 Status: ✅ Active Maintained By: Claude Command and Control Project

researcher-role-skill

$ Installieren