Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From ed3d-research-agents
Gathers well-sourced current internet info for API docs, library comparisons, best practices, hypothesis testing, and verifying technical claims to inform planning and design.
npx claudepluginhub ed3dai/ed3d-plugins-testing --plugin ed3d-research-agentsHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/ed3d-research-agents:researching-on-the-internetThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Gather accurate, current, well-sourced information from the internet to inform planning and design decisions. Test hypotheses, verify claims, and find authoritative sources for APIs, libraries, and best practices.
Gathers well-sourced current internet info for API docs, library comparisons, best practices, hypothesis testing, and verifying technical claims to inform planning and design.
Guides doc lookup and web search workflow for investigating libraries, APIs, or unfamiliar patterns before implementation.
Conducts focused research investigations with structured findings, confidence levels, and source citations. Spawns parallel scout agents for multi-angle research. Use when needing external information before deciding.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Gather accurate, current, well-sourced information from the internet to inform planning and design decisions. Test hypotheses, verify claims, and find authoritative sources for APIs, libraries, and best practices.
Use for:
Don't use for:
When given a hypothesis to test:
Example:
Hypothesis: "Library X is faster than Y for large datasets"
Search for:
✓ Benchmarks comparing X and Y
✓ Performance documentation for both
✓ GitHub issues mentioning performance
✓ Real-world case studies
Report:
- Supported: [evidence with links]
- Contradicted: [evidence with links]
- Conclusion: [supported/contradicted/mixed] with [confidence level]
| Task | Strategy |
|---|---|
| API docs | Official docs → GitHub README → Recent tutorials |
| Library comparison | Official sites → npm/PyPI stats → GitHub activity |
| Best practices | Official guides → Recent posts → Stack Overflow |
| Troubleshooting | Error search → GitHub issues → Stack Overflow |
| Current state | Release notes → Changelog → Recent announcements |
| Hypothesis testing | Define claims → Search both sides → Weight evidence |
| Tier | Sources | Usage |
|---|---|---|
| 1 - Most reliable | Official docs, release notes, changelogs | Primary evidence |
| 2 - Generally reliable | Verified tutorials, maintained examples, reputable blogs | Supporting evidence |
| 3 - Use with caution | Stack Overflow, forums, old tutorials | Check dates, cross-verify |
Always note source tier in findings.
Multiple approaches:
Cross-reference:
Lead with answer:
Include metadata:
Handle uncertainty clearly:
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| Searching only one source | Cross-reference minimum 2-3 sources |
| Ignoring publication dates | Check dates, flag outdated information |
| Treating all sources equally | Use tier system, weight accordingly |
| Reporting before verification | Verify claims across sources first |
| Vague hypothesis testing | Break into specific falsifiable claims |
| Skipping official docs | Always start with tier 1 sources |
| Over-confident with single source | Note source tier and look for consensus |