Source map

/source-map

Discovers and curates the sources a research artifact will eventually cite. Runs upstream of /desk-research standard / deep mode and upstream of the decision pipeline; can also run standalone before any synthesis.

When to invoke

• Before standard or deep research on an unfamiliar topic.
• After /identify-perspectives in the decision pipeline — sources are grouped per camp.
• Standalone, to scope which authorities a topic actually has.

Methodology

The core discovery move is survey-by-adjacency, not direct question-asking. STORM's finding: asking the LLM "who's authoritative on X" produces a generic, training-data-shaped list. Instead, survey adjacent material — papers that cite each other, blog posts that cross- reference, communities that share vocabulary — and let the authorities fall out of the pattern.

Treat any "who is authoritative on X" intuition the LLM produces as suspect. Discovery is empirical, not asserted.

Source taxonomy

Every candidate gets three tags:

1. Authority type — practitioner / researcher / vendor / journalist / community / regulator.
2. Recency — current (≤2 years) / recent (2–5 years) / historical (>5 years, still cited).
3. Primacy — primary (original source — the paper, the spec, the regulator's text), secondary (analyses and syntheses of primary material), tertiary (summaries-of-summaries, textbooks, encyclopedias).

The primacy tag is the most load-bearing — /desk-research triangulation requires ≥3 independent sources, and independence depends on primacy: three tertiary sources citing the same primary source count as one.

Procedure

1. Survey adjacency — issue WebSearch on the topic's key terms; skim the top-cited items; note who cites whom.
2. Dispatch extraction — on Claude Code, dispatch source-extractor subagent against the candidate list. Otherwise read each candidate inline.
3. Classify — tag each surviving source by authority + recency + primacy.
4. Write <topic-slug>-sources.md — group by primacy (primary first). In a decision-pipeline invocation, sub-group within primacy by camp (the upstream <topic-slug>-perspectives.md provides the camps). <topic-slug> is the kebab-case topic slug; the naming rule lives in the /desk-research skill body (§ Typed, topic-named artifacts).
5. Cite the rule — /desk-research will use <topic-slug>-sources.md to choose which sources to triangulate against.

Upstream / standalone behavior

/source-map runs in two shapes:

• Decision-pipeline invocation — expects an upstream <topic-slug>-perspectives.md. Sources are grouped by primacy and by camp, so /compare-hypotheses downstream can pull camp-aligned sources per hypothesis.
• Standalone invocation — no upstream <topic-slug>-perspectives.md required. Sources grouped by primacy only; the camp-grouping step is skipped.

The skill is not invoked by /decision-archaeology, which is self- contained. See that skill's body for why.

<topic-slug>-sources.md output schema

# Sources — <topic>

## Primary

- **<title>** ([url]) — <one-sentence summary>. Authority: <type>.
  Recency: <bucket>. [synthesis or citation note]

## Secondary

(same shape)

## Tertiary

(same shape)

In decision-pipeline mode, each primacy section is sub-grouped by camp under ### Camp: <name>.

Citation discipline

Every entry in <topic-slug>-sources.md carries a citation (the URL or local path). Notes about a source — its angle, its bias, its credibility — are marked [synthesis] when they integrate across sources or [inference] when they deduce from one.

Depth cues

Adopters can include cue tokens in the prompt to adjust behavior:

• quickly, top three, briefly, summary only — narrow the survey; return the most-cited handful per primacy bucket only.
• comprehensively, exhaustively, in depth, extensive — widen the survey; chase secondary citations into their primary sources; include weaker authorities for completeness.