Deep Researcher Skill

Aggregates insights from web, papers, video, and forums with paywall bypass to deliver comprehensive, unbiased, multi-format research and analysis.

geoffguides@geoffguides

Install

openclaw skills install @geoffguides/deep-researcher-skill

SKILL.md - Research Assistant

Description

Your personal research department. Multi-source synthesis that turns scattered information into actionable intelligence â not just summaries, but insights you can act on.

Price

Free â or $5 to support development.

Prerequisites

DuckDuckGo Search (built-in, no key needed)
YouTube Content tool (built-in, no key needed)
arXiv skill (built-in, no key needed)
Reddit Readonly skill (built-in, no key needed)
Browser tool (built-in, for paywall bypass)
Optional: NewsAPI key (free tier: 100 requests/day) â current events
Optional: OpenWeather API key (free tier: 1,000 calls/day) â location context
Optional: ExchangeRate-API key (free tier: 1,500 requests/month) â finance data
Optional: REST Countries API (no key needed) â demographics

Quick Start

Configure optional APIs: "Set up my research assistant with NewsAPI"
Research: "Research [topic]" or "Deep dive into [question]"

Commands

"Research [topic]" â Quick synthesis from multiple sources
"Deep dive into [question]" â Comprehensive analysis
"Compare [A] vs [B]" â Competitive/feature analysis
"What's new in [field] this month?" â Temporal research
"Research for [format]: [topic]" â Brief, thread, blog, or decision matrix
"Show my research history" â Previous queries and findings

Tool Selection Matrix

Source Type	Tool to Use	Fallback
Web search	`duckduckgo_search`	None needed
YouTube transcripts	`youtube-content` skill	Browser tool
Academic papers	`arxiv` skill	`duckduckgo_search` with site:arxiv.org
Forums/Reddit	`reddit-readonly` skill	None needed
Paywalled articles	`browser_navigate` + archive.org	12ft.io, textise dot iitty
Current events	NewsAPI (if configured)	`duckduckgo_search` news filter
Weather data	OpenWeather API	`duckduckgo_search`
Financial data	ExchangeRate-API	`duckduckgo_search`

Paywall Bypass Strategy

When you hit a paywall:

Try archive.org: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=URL or https://archive.org/web/*/URL
Try 12ft.io: https://12ft.io/URL (works for Medium, Substack, etc.)
Try textise dot iitty: https://r.jina.ai/http://URL (extracts article text)
Use browser tool: Navigate and extract text directly
Skip only if all fail â mark as "paywalled, unverified"

Core Workflows

1. Quick Research (2-3 minutes)

Input: Any question or topic

Process:

Parallel search across sources using tool matrix above
Fetch top 3-5 results per source
Bypass paywalls using strategy above
Extract key points from each
Synthesize into structured brief
Cite all sources with links

Output:

markdown

## Research Brief: [Topic]

### Executive Summary
[3-5 sentences covering the landscape]

### Key Findings
1. **[Finding]** â [Source type: web/video/paper/forum]
2. **[Finding]** â [Source type]
3. **[Finding]** â [Source type]

### Sources
- [Title](URL) â Web article, [Date]
- [Title](URL) â YouTube video, [Channel]
- [Title](URL) â arXiv paper, [Authors]
- [Title](URL) â Reddit discussion, [Subreddit]

### Confidence Score: [High/Medium/Low]
**Why:** [Source quality, recency, consensus level]

### Suggested Next Steps
- [Specific follow-up question]
- [Related topic to explore]
- [Deeper source to check]

2. Deep Dive Research (5-10 minutes)

Input: Complex question requiring comprehensive analysis

Process:

Multi-query expansion (break topic into sub-questions)
10-15 sources across all channels
Apply paywall bypass as needed
Temporal analysis (what's new vs. established)
Credibility scoring per source
Bias detection and flagging
Synthesis with uncertainty levels

Stopping Conditions â When to End:

Saturation: New sources repeat what you already found
Diminishing returns: 10+ sources but confidence still Low
Contradiction ceiling: >50% of sources disagree
Time limit: 15 minutes max for Deep Dive
Confidence achieved: High confidence with 3+ Tier 1 sources

Output:

markdown

## Deep Dive: [Topic]

### One-Paragraph Summary
[The TL;DR for busy decision-makers]

### Current State (What's Happening Now)
[Recent developments, 0-6 months]

### Established Knowledge (What We Know)
[Consensus views, foundational concepts]

### Points of Contention
- **[Claim A]** â [Evidence for] vs [Evidence against]
- **[Claim B]** â [Evidence for] vs [Evidence against]

### Source Quality Breakdown
| Source | Type | Credibility | Recency | Bias |
|--------|------|-------------|---------|------|
| [Name] | Academic | High | 2024 | Neutral |
| [Name] | News | Medium | 2025 | Center-left |
| [Name] | Forum | Low | 2025 | N/A |

### Confidence Calibration
**Level:** [High/Medium/Low]
**Reasoning:** [Why this level based on criteria below]

### Actionable Insights
1. **[Insight]** â [Specific action to take]
2. **[Insight]** â [Specific action to take]

### Knowledge Gaps
[What we still don't know]

### Recommended Follow-Up
- [Specific research question]
- [Expert to consult]
- [Primary source to find]

3. Comparative Analysis

Input: "Compare X vs Y" or "Feature gap analysis"

Process:

Research both subjects independently using tool matrix
Extract features/capabilities/attributes
Build comparison matrix
Identify gaps and differentiators
Score on key dimensions

Structured Data Extraction:

text

Pricing extraction pattern:
- Search: "[Product] pricing cost $"
- Look for: $XXX/month, $XXX/year, free tier limits
- Source: Official pricing page (bypass paywall if needed)

Feature extraction pattern:
- Search: "[Product] features vs [Competitor]"
- Look for: Feature lists, comparison tables
- Use: Browser tool to extract structured data

Sentiment extraction pattern:
- Reddit: Search r/[topic] for "[Product] review"
- Look for: Specific pros/cons with reasoning
- Score: Count positive vs negative mentions

Output:

markdown

## Comparison: [A] vs [B]

### At a Glance
| Dimension | [A] | [B] | Winner |
|-----------|-----|-----|--------|
| Price | $X | $Y | [A/B/Tie] |
| Key Feature | [Desc] | [Desc] | [A/B/Tie] |
| User Sentiment | [Score] | [Score] | [A/B/Tie] |

### Detailed Breakdown

**[A] Strengths:**
- [Point with source]
- [Point with source]

**[B] Strengths:**
- [Point with source]
- [Point with source]

**[A] Weaknesses:**
- [Point with source]

**[B] Weaknesses:**
- [Point with source]

### Feature Gap Analysis
- [Feature A]: [A] has it, [B] doesn't
- [Feature B]: Both have it, [A] does it better
- [Feature C]: Neither has it (opportunity)

### Verdict
[Recommendation with reasoning]

### Sources
[All citations]

4. Temporal Research (What's New)

Input: "What's new in [field] this [timeframe]?"

Process:

Filter sources by date using search filters
Compare to baseline (previous period)
Identify new developments, trends, shifts
Flag emerging vs. fading topics

Output:

markdown

## [Field] Update: [Timeframe]

### New Developments
1. **[Development]** â [Impact level] â [Source]
2. **[Development]** â [Impact level] â [Source]

### Trends to Watch
- [Trend]: [Evidence] â [Trajectory: rising/stable/falling]
- [Trend]: [Evidence] â [Trajectory]

### What's Fading
- [Topic]: [Why it's declining]

### Predictions (Speculative)
- [Prediction] â [Based on]

### Sources from This Period
[All recent citations]

5. Format-Specific Output

Brief Mode: Executive summary only (2-3 paragraphs)

Thread Mode: Twitter/X thread format

text

ð§µ [Topic]: [Hook]

1/ [Point]
2/ [Point]
3/ [Point]

[Sources]

Blog Mode: H2 outline with key points

text

## [Title]

### Introduction
[Hook]

### [Section 1]
[Key points]

### [Section 2]
[Key points]

### Conclusion
[Takeaway]

### Sources
[Citations]

Decision Matrix Mode: Pros/cons table with scoring

text

| Option | Pros | Cons | Score |
|--------|------|------|-------|
| [A] | [List] | [List] | X/10 |
| [B] | [List] | [List] | X/10 |

Confidence Calibration System

Don't guess â use these criteria:

High Confidence

Sources: 3+ Tier 1 (academic, official, expert) OR 5+ Tier 2
Recency: All sources <6 months old OR established consensus
Contradictions: Zero major contradictions
Corroboration: Findings confirmed by independent sources

Medium Confidence

Sources: 2+ Tier 2 (industry pubs, established blogs)
Recency: Mix of recent and established
Contradictions: Minor contradictions resolved
Gaps: Some uncertainty acknowledged

Low Confidence

Sources: Single source OR mostly Tier 4-5
Recency: Old data (>1 year) OR no date
Contradictions: Major contradictions unresolved
Gaps: Significant unknowns

Flag language:

High: "Research shows...", "Evidence confirms..."
Medium: "Sources suggest...", "It appears that..."
Low: "One source claims...", "Limited research indicates..."

Source Quality Scoring

Tier 1: Highest Credibility (Weight: 3x)

Peer-reviewed journals (Nature, Science, etc.)
Official documentation (gov, corporate)
SEC filings, regulatory documents
Direct primary sources

Tier 2: High Credibility (Weight: 2x)

Established news (Reuters, AP, BBC)
Expert blogs with track record
Industry analysts (Gartner, McKinsey)
Technical publications (IEEE, ACM)

Tier 3: Medium Credibility (Weight: 1x)

Industry publications
Established YouTube channels
Well-moderated forums
Think tank reports

Tier 4: Low Credibility (Weight: 0.5x)

General news coverage
Encyclopedia entries (Wikipedia â follow citations)
Content aggregators

Tier 5: Use Cautiously (Weight: 0.25x)

Anonymous forums
Unverified social posts
Personal blogs without track record

Auto-Skip

Known misinformation sources
Circular references (A cites B cites A)
Paywalled AND can't bypass

Bias Detection

Political Spectrum

Left / Center-left / Center / Center-right / Right
Flagged when source consistently leans one direction

Commercial Bias

None: No financial stake in topic
Disclosed: Affiliate links, sponsorships noted
Undisclosed: Potential conflicts not mentioned

Confirmation Bias Warning

"This source only presents one side"
"Contradictory evidence exists"
"Consensus vs. outlier view"

Domain-Specific Research Patterns

Product/Competitive Research (ClawMart/Gumroad)

Search: "[Product] vs [competitor] review"
Check: Pricing pages, feature lists
Mine: Reddit for real user experiences
Extract: Structured comparison table

Scientific/Medical Research

Start: PubMed, Cochrane Library for clinical
Check: arXiv for preprints
Verify: Primary sources, not news summaries
Flag: Single studies vs. meta-analyses

Financial Research

SEC filings (10-K, 10-Q) for public companies
Earnings call transcripts
Analyst reports (paid) â use summaries from news
ExchangeRate-API for currency data

Legal Research

Court documents via PACER or public dockets
Legal databases (Westlaw, Lexis â paywalled)
Law reviews and journals
Regulatory agency guidance

Configuration

research-config.json

json

{
  "apis": {
    "newsapi": {
      "key": "YOUR_NEWSAPI_KEY",
      "tier": "free"
    },
    "openweather": {
      "key": "YOUR_OPENWEATHER_KEY",
      "tier": "free"
    },
    "exchangerate": {
      "key": "YOUR_EXCHANGERATE_KEY",
      "tier": "free"
    }
  },
  "defaults": {
    "max_sources": 10,
    "recency_preference": "balanced",
    "output_format": "brief",
    "confidence_threshold": "medium"
  },
  "quality_thresholds": {
    "min_credibility": "medium",
    "max_age_days": 365,
    "require_diversity": true
  },
  "stopping_conditions": {
    "max_sources": 15,
    "max_time_minutes": 15,
    "saturation_threshold": 3
  }
}

Examples

Example 1: Quick Research

text

User: "Research AI video generation trends"

Agent:
## Research Brief: AI Video Generation Trends

### Executive Summary
AI video generation has exploded in 2024-2025 with Runway, Pika, and Kling leading consumer tools. Quality improved dramatically â 4-second clips now rival professional footage. Open-source alternatives (Stable Video Diffusion) gaining traction. Key limitation: temporal consistency in longer sequences.

### Key Findings
1. **Runway Gen-2** is market leader for quality â $15/mo, 4-second clips
2. **Pika Labs** offers budget alternative at $8/mo with good results
3. **Kling AI** (China-based) emerging as quality competitor
4. **Open source** (Stable Video Diffusion) viable for technical users

### Sources
- [The State of AI Video 2025](URL) â Web, Jan 2025
- [Runway vs Pika: Comparison](URL) â YouTube, TechChannel
- [Stable Video Diffusion Paper](URL) â arXiv, 2024
- [r/MachineLearning discussion](URL) â Reddit, Feb 2025

### Confidence Score: High
Multiple Tier 2+ sources confirm, recent data, established consensus. Zero contradictions.

### Suggested Next Steps
- Deep dive into temporal consistency solutions
- Compare pricing for high-volume production
- Research enterprise alternatives (Sora, etc.)

Example 2: Competitive Analysis with Paywall Bypass

text

User: "Compare ElevenLabs vs Play.ht for voice generation"

Agent:
## Comparison: ElevenLabs vs Play.ht

### At a Glance
| Dimension | ElevenLabs | Play.ht | Winner |
|-----------|------------|---------|--------|
| Price | $5/mo | $30/mo | ElevenLabs |
| Quality | Excellent | Good | ElevenLabs |
| Languages | 29 | 142 | Play.ht |
| API | Yes | Yes | Tie |

### Pricing Research
- ElevenLabs: $5/mo Starter, $22/mo Creator (source: pricing page)
- Play.ht: $30/mo Personal, $99/mo Pro (source: pricing page)

### User Sentiment (Reddit r/elevenlabs, r/speech synthesis)
- ElevenLabs: 85% positive (quality praised, occasional latency issues)
- Play.ht: 70% positive (good languages, expensive for quality)

### Verdict
ElevenLabs for quality/price, Play.ht if you need obscure languages.

[Full breakdown with sources...]

Guardrails

Always cite sources â never present synthesis as original research
Flag uncertainty with calibrated language ("likely" vs "confirms")
Bypass paywalls before skipping â don't leave knowledge on the table
Respect rate limits â cache results, batch when possible
Verify recency â old data can mislead
Acknowledge gaps â "limited research exists on..."
Stop when conditions met â don't over-research

Troubleshooting

Error: "No results found"

Try broader search terms
Check tool availability
Verify internet connection

Error: "Rate limit exceeded"

Wait 60 seconds, retry
Switch to fallback tools
Use cached results when available

Error: "Source quality too low"

Broaden search terms
Remove recency filter
Try alternative sources from tool matrix
Accept "Low confidence" finding

Error: "Paywall blocking access"

Try archive.org
Try 12ft.io
Try textise dot iitty
Use browser tool to extract
Only skip if all methods fail

Version History

V1.0: Multi-source search, synthesis, 4 output formats
V1.1: Bias detection, temporal research, competitive analysis
V1.2: Source quality scoring, citation export, research history
V1.3: Public APIs integration â NewsAPI, OpenWeather, ExchangeRate-API, REST Countries
V1.4:
- Added tool selection matrix (platform-agnostic)
- Added paywall bypass strategy
- Added confidence calibration system
- Added stopping conditions
- Added structured data extraction patterns
- Added domain-specific research patterns

Turn information into intelligence.

Deep Researcher Skill

Install

SKILL.md - Research Assistant

Description

Price

Prerequisites

Quick Start

Commands

Tool Selection Matrix

Paywall Bypass Strategy

Core Workflows

1. Quick Research (2-3 minutes)

2. Deep Dive Research (5-10 minutes)

3. Comparative Analysis

4. Temporal Research (What's New)

5. Format-Specific Output

Confidence Calibration System

High Confidence

Medium Confidence

Low Confidence

Source Quality Scoring

Tier 1: Highest Credibility (Weight: 3x)

Tier 2: High Credibility (Weight: 2x)

Tier 3: Medium Credibility (Weight: 1x)

Tier 4: Low Credibility (Weight: 0.5x)

Tier 5: Use Cautiously (Weight: 0.25x)

Auto-Skip

Bias Detection

Political Spectrum

Commercial Bias

Confirmation Bias Warning

Domain-Specific Research Patterns

Product/Competitive Research (ClawMart/Gumroad)

Scientific/Medical Research

Financial Research

Legal Research

Configuration

research-config.json

Examples

Example 1: Quick Research

Example 2: Competitive Analysis with Paywall Bypass

Guardrails

Troubleshooting

Version History

Related skills