Research synthesis brief
Skill ClarentCinematics/Codex-Skills-for-Enterprise/skills/research-synthesis-brief
npx -y skills add ClarentCinematics/Codex-Skills-for-Enterprise --skill research-synthesis-briefAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Synthesize multiple sources, reports, notes, articles, datasets, interviews, or research excerpts into claims, evidence, caveats, contradictions, confidence levels, and recommended actions. Use when Codex needs to create source-grounded research briefs, executive summaries, evidence reviews, or decision support.
SKILL.md
1.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Research Synthesis Brief
Workflow
- Identify research question, audience, decision context, source set, and time sensitivity.
- Extract claims, evidence, methods, dates, limitations, contradictions, and source quality signals.
- Separate what is known, what is inferred, what conflicts, and what remains unknown.
- Synthesize findings into decision-relevant implications rather than source-by-source summaries.
- Produce a brief with confidence levels, caveats, and recommended next actions.
Output Standard
Use this structure by default:
- Research Question: what the brief answers.
- Bottom Line: concise answer with confidence level.
- Key Findings: claims with evidence and caveats.
- Evidence Table: source, claim supported, strength, limitation.
- Contradictions / Gaps: conflicts, missing data, and uncertainty.
- Decision Implications: what the findings mean for action.
- Recommended Next Steps: follow-up research, validation, or decision path.
Rules
- Do not cite or rely on sources not provided unless the user asks for external research.
- Label confidence and uncertainty explicitly.
- Do not flatten conflicting evidence into a false consensus.
- Keep source-grounding clear enough for a human reviewer to audit.
References
Read references/evidence-rubric.md when the user asks for evidence grading, confidence scoring, contradiction handling, or decision implications.