---
name: deep-research-prompt-builder
description: This skill should be used when the user asks to "build a research prompt", "create a deep research query", "enhance my research question", "structure a research prompt", "help me write a research prompt", or needs help transforming research topics into comprehensive prompts for product comparisons, technical documentation, academic literature, market analysis, or any domain requiring structured deep research.
---

# Deep Research Prompt Builder

Expert system for constructing high-quality research prompts through adaptive interviewing and best-practice application.

## Core Workflow

### 1. Categorize Research Topic

When user provides a topic, immediately categorize it:

- **Product/Service**: Shopping comparisons, reviews, buying guides
- **Technical**: Code patterns, architecture, implementation details
- **Academic**: Literature reviews, theoretical analysis, scientific research
- **Business**: Market analysis, competitive intelligence, trends
- **General**: Historical, cultural, educational topics

### 2. Conduct Adaptive Interview

Ask questions ONE AT A TIME. Wait for the response before proceeding.

**Generate questions that directly probe the specific research topic.** Use the category examples below as inspiration, not scripts. Each question should surface something the user has not yet specified about the actual topic.

#### Using AskUserQuestion (Optional Enhancement)

If the `AskUserQuestion` tool is available, use it to provide a more structured interview experience with clear options. This enhances usability but is not required - fall back to conversational questions if the tool is unavailable.

**When to use AskUserQuestion:**
- Category-specific questions where there are clear, distinct options
- Priority ordering questions (when requirements might conflict)
- Confirmation questions before generating the final prompt
- Clarifying ambiguous terminology with specific interpretations

**When to use conversational questions:**
- Open-ended exploration questions
- Questions that need nuanced, free-form responses
- Follow-up questions that depend on complex context
- When the user's answer suggests they need to explain more

#### Clarification Triggers

Before proceeding with interview questions, clarify when:

- The user uses ambiguous or unusual terminology (use AskUserQuestion with specific interpretation options if available)
- Scope is mentioned but intent is unclear (what specifically matters about it?)
- The user gives compound answers - confirm priority ordering (use AskUserQuestion with ordered options if available)
- Technical terms may have multiple meanings in context

#### Opening Question (All Categories)

"What specific aspect of [TOPIC] are you most interested in exploring?"

#### Category-Specific Question Examples

Use these as **inspiration only** - adapt questions to the actual topic at hand:

**Product/Service examples:**

- Research goal: current best options, specific comparisons, or understanding what makes something good?
- Key criteria and their priority order
- Preferred output format

*Example with AskUserQuestion (if available):*
- Question: "What's your primary goal for this product research?"
  - Options: "Find the best option to buy now", "Compare specific products I'm considering", "Understand evaluation criteria", "General market overview"
- Question: "Which criteria matter most for your decision?"
  - Options: "Price and value", "Features and capabilities", "Reliability and reviews", "Long-term costs"
  - multiSelect: true

**Technical examples:**

- Context: learning, implementing, or making architectural decisions?
- Critical aspects: performance, best practices, pitfalls, examples?
- Depth needed: overview, implementation guide, or deep analysis?

*Example with AskUserQuestion (if available):*
- Question: "What's your context for researching this technical topic?"
  - Options: "Learning the fundamentals", "Implementing in a project", "Making architectural decisions", "Troubleshooting issues"
- Question: "Which aspects are most critical?"
  - Options: "Performance characteristics", "Best practices and patterns", "Common pitfalls to avoid", "Practical examples"
  - multiSelect: true
- Question: "What depth of coverage do you need?"
  - Options: "High-level overview", "Implementation-focused guide", "Deep technical analysis", "Comprehensive reference"

**Academic examples:**

- Purpose: literature review, hypothesis exploration, or current knowledge state?
- Time scope preferences
- Evidence standards: peer-reviewed only or broader sources?

*Example with AskUserQuestion (if available):*
- Question: "What's the purpose of this academic research?"
  - Options: "Comprehensive literature review", "Exploring a specific hypothesis", "Understanding current state of knowledge", "Identifying research gaps"
- Question: "What evidence standards should be applied?"
  - Options: "Peer-reviewed only", "Include preprints and working papers", "Include reputable non-academic sources", "Broad sources for comprehensive view"

**Business examples:**

- Focus: market landscape, competitor analysis, or trends?
- Most valuable data types
- Scope boundaries

**General examples:**

- What's driving this research?
- Perspective: comprehensive, specific angle, or comparative?
- Key debates or controversies to address?

#### Closing Question (All)

"Any specific angle or outcome you haven't mentioned that should shape this research?"

### 3. Build Enhanced Prompt

#### Prompt Construction Principles

- **Include only what was discussed or directly implied**
- Do NOT add "enhancements" the user didn't ask about
- If uncertain whether to include something, leave it out
- Scope mentions (geographic, temporal, etc.) should reflect user's stated intent, not assumed interests
- No speculative expansions beyond what user requested

Use this template structure:

```
# Research Objective
[Clear statement synthesized from topic and clarifications]

# Context and Scope
- Purpose: [Why this research matters]
- Boundaries: [Time, geography, domain limits]
- Focus Areas: [3-5 specific aspects to emphasize]

# Research Requirements

## Investigation Depth
Primary questions:
1. [Main research question]
2. [Key sub-question 1]
3. [Key sub-question 2]

Secondary considerations:
- [Related area if relevant]
- [Adjacent topic to explore]

Explicitly exclude: [What NOT to research]

## Evidence Standards
- Source types: [Academic, industry, user-generated, etc.]
- Recency: [How current sources must be]
- Credibility: [Minimum authority level]
- Citations: [How to reference sources]

## Analysis Framework
[INSERT CATEGORY-SPECIFIC FRAMEWORK - see below]

## Output Structure
### Required Sections:
1. Executive Summary (3-5 key findings)
2. Detailed Analysis by Subtopic
3. Supporting Evidence with Citations
4. Practical Implications
5. Confidence Levels and Limitations
6. Further Research Needed

### Format Requirements:
- Hierarchical headings for navigation
- Data visualization descriptions where helpful
- Balance depth with readability
- Include both synthesis and details

# Quality Instructions

## Reasoning Approach
- Think step-by-step through each research aspect
- Build from foundational understanding to nuances
- Explicitly address source contradictions
- Validate through multiple independent sources

## Critical Evaluation
- Cross-reference all major claims
- Distinguish facts from interpretations
- Note confidence levels for findings
- Acknowledge information gaps

[Additional topic-specific instructions from interview]
```

## Category-Specific Frameworks

Insert appropriate framework based on category:

### Product Framework

```
## Analysis Framework
- Feature comparison matrix across top options
- Price-performance analysis
- Real user experience synthesis
- Expert review aggregation
- Long-term value assessment
- Common issues and solutions
```

### Technical Framework

```
## Analysis Framework
- Implementation complexity assessment
- Performance and scalability analysis
- Code examples and patterns
- Best practices vs anti-patterns
- Tool ecosystem and dependencies
- Migration and maintenance considerations
```

### Academic Framework

```
## Analysis Framework
- Theoretical foundations and evolution
- Methodological approaches comparison
- Key findings synthesis across studies
- Debates and controversies mapping
- Research gaps identification
- Future direction assessment
```

### Business Framework

```
## Analysis Framework
- Market dynamics and size
- Competitive landscape mapping
- Customer segment analysis
- Growth drivers and barriers
- Risk and opportunity assessment
- Strategic recommendations
```

### General Framework

```
## Analysis Framework
- Historical context and evolution
- Multiple perspective comparison
- Cultural and societal impacts
- Current state assessment
- Future implications
- Related topic connections
```

## Additional Resources

For complete example prompts across all categories, see `references/example-prompts.md`.
For advanced prompting techniques (CoT, self-consistency, role-based framing), see `references/prompt-techniques.md`.

## Prompt Enhancement Techniques

Apply these **only when directly relevant to what the user discussed**. Do not add enhancements speculatively.

### For Vague Topics (if user's topic lacks clear boundaries)

Add: "Begin by establishing clear definitions and scope based on authoritative consensus, then proceed with focused analysis."

### For Controversial Topics (if user mentions debates or conflicting views)

Add: "Present multiple viewpoints with supporting evidence. Clearly distinguish between consensus, debate, and speculation."

### For Emerging Fields (if user is researching something new/rapidly evolving)

Add: "Note the recency of this domain. Prioritize latest developments while acknowledging rapid change and limited long-term data."

### For Comparative Research (if user explicitly wants comparisons)

Add: "Develop systematic comparison criteria before analysis. Ensure fair, parallel evaluation across all options."

### For Technical Implementation (if user needs practical guidance)

Add: "Include practical examples, common gotchas, and real-world considerations beyond theoretical knowledge."

## Pre-Output Confirmation

Before generating the final prompt, first output a summary of what was discussed:

"Based on the discussion, the prompt will focus on:

- [Primary goal]
- [Key criteria]
- [Scope boundaries]"

**Then, if AskUserQuestion is available:**

Use it to confirm next steps:
- Question: "Should I proceed with generating the research prompt?"
  - Options: "Yes, generate it", "Yes, but add/change something first", "Let me review the requirements again"

**If AskUserQuestion is not available:**

Ask conversationally: "Anything to add or remove before generating it?"

## Output Format

After confirmation, preface final prompt with:
"Here's your enhanced research prompt. Copy and use this for comprehensive deep research:"

```
[Complete enhanced prompt in code block for easy copying]
```

## Quality Checklist

Before outputting, verify the prompt includes:

- [ ] Clear, specific research objective
- [ ] Defined scope and boundaries
- [ ] Evidence requirements
- [ ] Output structure
- [ ] Reasoning instructions
- [ ] Quality evaluation criteria
- [ ] Topic-specific enhancements (only if discussed)
- [ ] Contains ONLY elements discussed or directly requested
- [ ] No speculative enhancements added

## Prompt Validation

To validate the generated prompt contains all required sections, run:

```bash
python scripts/validate_prompt.py prompt.txt
```

The validator checks for required sections, recommended elements, and provides a quality score. Use this before delivering the final prompt to ensure completeness.

## Interaction Guidelines

- Keep questions concise and clear
- One question at a time for better user experience
- Use AskUserQuestion tool when available for structured choices (enhances UX but is optional)
- Skip questions if the user provides information upfront
- Adapt depth based on user expertise signals
- If requirements conflict, ask for priority (use AskUserQuestion with ordered options if available)
- If scope is too broad, suggest splitting into multiple research tasks