Agent skill

Prp Research Team

by Wirasm in Wirasm/prp

Design a dynamic research team and plan using agent teams -- analyzes question, composes team, creates executable research plan.

MITAuto-check passedAgent Workflows

Install Prp Research Team

skills CLI
$ npx skills add Wirasm/prp --skill prp-research-team -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install Wirasm/prp prp-research-team --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Wirasm/prp.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/.claude/skills/prp-research-team .claude/skills/prp-research-team && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
prp-research-team
GitHub stars
2.3k
Token cost
~4.9k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,319 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
37
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Design a dynamic research team and plan using agent teams -- analyzes question, composes team, creates executable research plan.

  • Works in 7 steps: PARSE — Extract Research Question → CLASSIFY — Domain & Complexity → DECOMPOSE — Sub-Questions → …
  • The user wants to plan multi-agent research on a question
  • SKILL.md covers Mission, Variables, Phase 1: PARSE — Extract… and Phase 2: CLASSIFY — Domain &…, plus 5 more sections
  • Calls git

What it does

Prp Research Team is an agent skill from Wirasm/prp. Design a dynamic research team and plan using agent teams -- analyzes question, composes team, creates executable research plan. Use when the user wants to plan multi-agent research on a question or topic, or invokes /prp-research-team.

Its SKILL.md is about 4.9k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in Agent Workflows, covering Hypothesis generation. The repository describes itself as: Prompts, workflows and more for agentic engineering. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • The user wants to plan multi-agent research on a question
  • Invokes /prp-research-team

Example prompts

  • “/prp-research-team”

Workflow steps

7 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. PARSE — Extract Research Question
  2. CLASSIFY — Domain & Complexity
  3. DECOMPOSE — Sub-Questions
  4. COMPOSE — Design Team Roles
  5. PLAN — Research Tasks
  6. GENERATE — Write Research Plan
  7. OUTPUT — Report to User

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 4352925. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    Shell commands in SKILL.md call:

    • git

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md. Its commands use git, which can reach the network depending on how they are called.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Prp Research Team loads about 4.9k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 64 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,319 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~64
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~4.9k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from Wirasm/prp at commit 4352925, republished under its MIT licence (© Wirasm). 1,319 words, ~4,910 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/prp-research-team/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
prp-research-team
description
Design a dynamic research team and plan using agent teams -- analyzes question, composes team, creates executable research plan. Use when the user wants to plan multi-agent research on a question or topic, or invokes /prp-research-team.
argument-hint
<research question or topic> [--orchestration "guidance for team composition"]

PRP Research Team Planner

Input: $ARGUMENTS


Mission

Design a dynamic team of research agents and a structured research plan for any given question or topic. The plan targets Claude Code's experimental agent teams feature (TeamCreate, shared task list, delegate mode).

Core Principle: PLAN ONLY — no research is executed. Produce a comprehensive, executable research plan that enables a team of agents to deliver thorough findings.

Golden Rule: Every researcher must have a clear focus, measurable completion criteria, and a defined output format. No vague mandates.

Doctrine: The research question dictates the team — never force a fixed roster. A market research question demands different expertise than a codebase architecture question.


Variables

VariableSourceDefault
$ARGUMENTSUser input— (required)
ORCHESTRATION--orchestration "..." flag in $ARGUMENTSEmpty (auto-compose)
OUTPUT_DIRFixed$PRP_DIR/research-plans/

Phase 1: PARSE — Extract Research Question

1.1 Parse Arguments

Extract from $ARGUMENTS:

  • Research question or topic: Everything that is NOT a flag
  • Orchestration guidance: Value after --orchestration flag (if present)

Parsing rules:

  1. Strip --orchestration "..." or --orchestration '...' from arguments → store as ORCHESTRATION
  2. Remaining text = research question
  3. If question is empty after parsing → STOP with error
1.2 Identify Scope Signals

Scan the research question for scope indicators:

SignalExampleImplication
Comparative ("vs", "compare", "alternatives")"React vs Vue vs Svelte"Multiple perspectives needed
Evaluative ("best", "optimal", "should we")"Best approach for real-time sync"Criteria definition needed
Exploratory ("how", "what are", "landscape")"What are the approaches to..."Broad survey needed
Investigative ("why", "root cause", "debug")"Why does X fail under Y"Deep-dive analysis needed
Quantitative ("benchmark", "performance", "cost")"Performance cost of SSR"Measurement methodology needed
1.3 Validate

If question is empty or unclear:

Research question required.

Usage:
  /prp-research-team "What are the best approaches for real-time collaboration?"
  /prp-research-team "Compare state management libraries for React" --orchestration "Focus on bundle size and DX"

PHASE_1_CHECKPOINT:

  • Research question extracted and non-empty
  • --orchestration flag parsed (or confirmed absent)
  • Scope signals identified

GATE: If the research question is too vague to decompose into sub-questions → STOP and ASK user for clarification.


Phase 2: CLASSIFY — Domain & Complexity

2.1 Determine Research Domain

Classify the question into one or more domains:

DomainIndicatorsTypical Researcher Profiles
CODEBASEReferences project files, patterns, architectureCode analyst, pattern extractor, dependency mapper
TECHNICALLibraries, frameworks, protocols, algorithmsDocs researcher, benchmarker, compatibility analyst
MARKETProducts, competitors, pricing, trendsMarket analyst, competitive researcher, trend tracker
USER_RESEARCHUser needs, behavior, UX, feedbackUX researcher, survey analyst, persona builder
ARCHITECTURESystem design, scalability, trade-offsSystems architect, performance analyst, security reviewer
MIXEDSpans multiple domainsCombination of above

For MIXED domains, identify the primary domain and supporting domains.

2.2 Assess Complexity
ComplexityCriteriaTeam SizeSub-questions
LOWSingle domain, narrow scope, well-defined2-3 researchers3-4
MEDIUM2 domains, moderate scope, some ambiguity3-5 researchers4-6
HIGH3+ domains, broad scope, significant ambiguity5-7 researchers5-7

Complexity factors:

  • Number of domains involved
  • Breadth of the question
  • Depth of analysis required
  • Number of comparative dimensions
  • Whether primary research vs. synthesis
2.3 Apply Orchestration Override

If ORCHESTRATION is set, adjust:

  • Team composition emphasis
  • Domain weighting
  • Specific expertise requirements
  • Any constraints on approach

PHASE_2_CHECKPOINT:

  • Primary domain identified with rationale
  • Supporting domains listed (if MIXED)
  • Complexity assessed with team size determined
  • Orchestration guidance applied (if provided)

Phase 3: DECOMPOSE — Sub-Questions

3.1 Break Down Research Question

Decompose into 3-7 independently investigable sub-questions.

Decomposition rules:

  1. Each sub-question must be answerable by a single researcher
  2. Sub-questions should cover the full scope of the original question
  3. Identify which sub-questions can run in PARALLEL vs. which have DEPENDENCIES
  4. Tag each sub-question with its primary domain
3.2 Map Dependencies

Create a dependency graph:

SQ-1 (foundational) ──┬──► SQ-2 (parallel)
                       ├──► SQ-3 (parallel)
                       └──► SQ-4 (parallel)
                                    │
                                    ▼
                              SQ-5 (synthesis, depends on SQ-2,3,4)

Dependency types:

  • NONE: Can start immediately
  • BLOCKED_BY: Must wait for specific sub-questions
  • INFORMS: Benefits from but doesn't require other results
3.3 Validate Coverage

Check that sub-questions collectively:

  • Cover the full scope of the original question
  • Don't have significant overlap (some overlap at boundaries is acceptable)
  • Include at least one synthesis/integration sub-question

PHASE_3_CHECKPOINT:

  • 3-7 sub-questions defined
  • Each sub-question is independently investigable
  • Dependencies mapped (parallel vs. sequential)
  • Full coverage of original question verified
  • At least one synthesis sub-question included

Phase 4: COMPOSE — Design Team Roles

4.1 Design Researcher Profiles

For each researcher, define:

FieldDescription
NameDescriptive role name (e.g., "API Compatibility Analyst")
Focus1-2 sentence description of their research area
Sub-questionsWhich SQ-IDs they own
Modelsonnet for most research, opus for synthesis/complex analysis
Spawn promptComplete instructions for the agent — must be self-contained
Output formatExact structure of their deliverable (markdown sections, tables, etc.)
Completion criteriaMeasurable conditions that define "done"
4.2 Spawn Prompt Requirements

Each spawn prompt MUST include:

  1. Role statement: Who you are and what you're investigating
  2. Research question(s): The specific sub-questions assigned
  3. Methodology: How to approach the research (web search, code analysis, doc review, etc.)
  4. Output format: Exact markdown structure for findings
  5. Quality bar: What constitutes sufficient depth
  6. Completion signal: How to indicate research is complete (update shared task)
Show full SKILL.md (537 more words)Show less
4.3 Model Selection
Researcher TypeRecommended ModelRationale
Data gatherer / doc reviewersonnetEfficient for search and extraction
Deep analyst / synthesizeropusBetter reasoning for complex analysis
Benchmarker / comparatorsonnetStructured comparison tasks
Lead researcher / integratoropusSynthesis across multiple inputs
4.4 Apply Orchestration to Team

If ORCHESTRATION is set, verify the team composition aligns with the guidance. Adjust roles, emphasis, or add/remove researchers as needed.

PHASE_4_CHECKPOINT:

  • Each researcher has all 7 fields defined
  • Spawn prompts are self-contained (no external context needed)
  • Output formats are specific and structured
  • Completion criteria are measurable
  • Model selection is justified
  • Team covers all sub-questions with no gaps

Phase 5: PLAN — Research Tasks

5.1 Create Task List

For each task, define:

FieldDescription
IDRT-{N} sequential identifier
TitleShort descriptive title
AssigneeResearcher name
TypeRESEARCH / ANALYSIS / SYNTHESIS / REVIEW
DependenciesList of RT-IDs that must complete first (or NONE)
DescriptionWhat specifically needs to be done
Acceptance criteriaHow to verify the task is complete
Estimated effortLOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
5.2 Task Ordering
  1. Wave 1: All tasks with no dependencies (parallel)
  2. Wave 2: Tasks that depend on Wave 1 outputs
  3. Wave 3: Synthesis and integration tasks
  4. Final: Review and quality assurance
5.3 Define Cross-Cutting Concerns

Identify shared standards across all researchers:

  • Citation format and requirements
  • Confidence level tagging (HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW with rationale)
  • Contradiction handling (when sources disagree)
  • Scope boundary enforcement (when to stop digging)

PHASE_5_CHECKPOINT:

  • Every sub-question has at least one task
  • Dependencies form a valid DAG (no cycles)
  • Parallel tasks identified for maximum throughput
  • Synthesis task exists to integrate findings
  • Cross-cutting concerns defined

Phase 6: GENERATE — Write Research Plan

6.1 Create Output Directory
bash
# --- PRP store resolver (canonical; keep byte-identical across skills) ---
# Adopt the store that already records this root; mint a key only when none does.
_gd="$(git rev-parse --path-format=absolute --git-common-dir 2>/dev/null)"
case "$_gd" in */.git) _root="${_gd%/.git}" ;; "") _root="$PWD" ;; *) _root="$_gd" ;; esac
_root="$(cd "$_root" && pwd -P)"
_name="$(basename "$_root" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' | tr -cs 'a-z0-9' '-' | sed 's/^-*//;s/-*$//')"
_home="${PRP_HOME:-$HOME/.prp}"
_hit="$(grep -lsF "\"path\": \"$_root\"" "$_home"/*/project.json 2>/dev/null | head -1)"
PRP_DIR="${_hit%/project.json}"
[ -n "$PRP_DIR" ] || PRP_DIR="$_home/${_name:-project}-$(printf %s "$_root" | git hash-object --stdin | cut -c1-8)"
mkdir -p "$PRP_DIR"; [ -f "$PRP_DIR/project.json" ] || printf '{"path": "%s", "name": "%s"}\n' "$_root" "${_name:-project}" > "$PRP_DIR/project.json"

mkdir -p "$PRP_DIR/research-plans"
6.2 Determine Output Filename

Convert the research topic to kebab-case, truncate to 50 chars max:

  • "What are the best approaches for real-time collaboration?" → real-time-collaboration
  • "Compare React vs Vue vs Svelte for enterprise apps" → react-vs-vue-vs-svelte-enterprise

Output path: $PRP_DIR/research-plans/{topic-slug}.research-plan.md (report the expanded absolute path to the user).

6.3 Write State Sentinel

Write the expanded absolute output path to $PRP_DIR/state/prp-research-team.state so the Stop hook can validate:

bash
mkdir -p "$PRP_DIR/state"
printf '%s\n' "$PRP_DIR/research-plans/{topic-slug}.research-plan.md" > "$PRP_DIR/state/prp-research-team.state"

Just the file path, one line, no extra content.

6.4 Write Research Plan

Write the research plan to the output path using this exact template:

markdown
# Research Plan: {Research Question}

## Metadata

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Date | {YYYY-MM-DD} |
| Topic | {short topic name} |
| Domain | {PRIMARY / MIXED: list} |
| Complexity | {LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH} |
| Team Size | {N} researchers |
| Sub-questions | {N} |
| Tasks | {N} |

---

## Research Question

{The original research question, clearly stated and unambiguous.}

{If orchestration guidance was provided:}
**Orchestration**: {The orchestration guidance}

---

## Research Question Decomposition

| ID | Sub-question | Domain | Parallel | Dependencies | Assigned To |
|----|-------------|--------|----------|--------------|-------------|
| SQ-1 | {sub-question text} | {domain} | {yes/no} | {NONE or SQ-IDs} | {researcher name} |
| SQ-2 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

### Dependency Graph

{ASCII dependency diagram showing parallel vs. sequential flow}

---

## Team Composition

### {Researcher 1 Name}

- **Focus**: {1-2 sentence description}
- **Sub-questions**: {SQ-IDs}
- **Model**: {sonnet / opus}
- **Output format**: {description of deliverable structure}
- **Completion criteria**: {measurable conditions}

**Spawn prompt**:
> {Complete, self-contained instructions for this agent. Must include:
> role statement, assigned sub-questions, methodology, output format,
> quality bar, and completion signal. The agent must be able to execute
> with ONLY this prompt — no external context.}

### {Researcher 2 Name}

{Same structure as above}

{Repeat for all researchers...}

---

## Research Tasks

### Wave 1: Foundation (Parallel)

| ID | Title | Assignee | Type | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria | Effort |
|----|-------|----------|------|-------------|-------------------|--------|
| RT-1 | {title} | {name} | RESEARCH | NONE | {criteria} | {LOW/MED/HIGH} |

### Wave 2: Deep Analysis

| ID | Title | Assignee | Type | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria | Effort |
|----|-------|----------|------|-------------|-------------------|--------|
| RT-N | {title} | {name} | ANALYSIS | RT-1, RT-2 | {criteria} | {LOW/MED/HIGH} |

### Wave 3: Synthesis

| ID | Title | Assignee | Type | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria | Effort |
|----|-------|----------|------|-------------|-------------------|--------|
| RT-N | {title} | {name} | SYNTHESIS | RT-... | {criteria} | {LOW/MED/HIGH} |

### Cross-Cutting Concerns

- **Citations**: {format requirements}
- **Confidence levels**: Tag all findings as HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW with rationale
- **Contradictions**: When sources disagree, document both positions with evidence
- **Scope boundaries**: {when to stop investigating a thread}

---

## Team Orchestration Guide

### Prerequisites

This research plan is designed for execution using Claude Code's experimental **agent teams** feature. Before executing:

1. Ensure agent teams is enabled (experimental feature)
2. Review the team composition and adjust if needed
3. Confirm the research question and scope

### Execution Steps

1. **Create team**: Use `TeamCreate` to spawn all researchers defined in Team Composition
2. **Create shared tasks**: Use the shared task list to create all tasks from the Research Tasks section
3. **Set dependencies**: Link tasks with their dependencies so agents pick up work in the correct order
4. **Monitor progress**: Use delegate mode or direct messaging to check on researcher progress
5. **Collect outputs**: Each researcher posts findings to their assigned tasks
6. **Run synthesis**: The synthesis researcher integrates all findings into the final report

### Display Mode

Use **delegate mode** for autonomous execution:
- Researchers work independently on their assigned tasks
- The lead researcher monitors progress and resolves blockers
- Use `SendMessage` to communicate between researchers when dependencies complete

### Communication Patterns

- **Handoff**: When a Wave 1 researcher completes, notify dependent Wave 2 researchers via task updates
- **Clarification**: Researchers can message the lead for scope questions
- **Contradiction**: If two researchers find conflicting information, escalate to lead for resolution

### Plan Approval

Before execution, review:
- [ ] Team composition matches the research domain
- [ ] Spawn prompts are detailed enough for autonomous execution
- [ ] Task dependencies are correct
- [ ] Acceptance criteria are measurable

---

## Acceptance Criteria

Research is complete when ALL of the following are met:

- [ ] Every sub-question (SQ-*) has been investigated and answered
- [ ] Every research task (RT-*) has been completed and meets its acceptance criteria
- [ ] Findings are cited with sources and confidence levels
- [ ] Contradictions are documented with both positions
- [ ] A synthesis document integrates all findings into a coherent answer
- [ ] The original research question is directly answered with evidence

---

## Output Format: Final Report Structure

The final research report (produced during execution, not in this plan) should follow:

1. **Executive Summary** — Direct answer to the research question (2-3 paragraphs)
2. **Key Findings** — Bulleted list of major discoveries
3. **Detailed Analysis** — Section per sub-question with evidence
4. **Comparative Matrix** — If applicable, structured comparison table
5. **Recommendations** — Actionable next steps with confidence levels
6. **Sources** — All references with URLs and access dates
7. **Appendix** — Raw data, extended quotes, additional context

PHASE_6_CHECKPOINT:

  • Output directory exists
  • State sentinel file written with the expanded absolute output path
  • Research plan file written with ALL required sections
  • All researcher spawn prompts are self-contained
  • All tasks have acceptance criteria
  • Template sections are filled (no placeholders remain)

GATE: Do NOT proceed to Phase 7 until the research plan file passes validation — all 6 required sections must be present:

  1. ## Research Question
  2. ## Research Question Decomposition
  3. ## Team Composition
  4. ## Research Tasks
  5. ## Team Orchestration Guide
  6. ## Acceptance Criteria

Phase 7: OUTPUT — Report to User

Display a summary to the user:

markdown
## Research Plan Created

**File**: `{output path}`
**Question**: {research question}

### Team Composition ({N} researchers)

| Researcher | Focus | Model |
|------------|-------|-------|
| {name} | {1-line focus} | {model} |

### Plan Overview

- **Domain**: {domain classification}
- **Complexity**: {LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH}
- **Sub-questions**: {N}
- **Tasks**: {N} ({W1} parallel → {W2} analysis → {W3} synthesis)

### Execution

To execute this research plan with agent teams:
1. Review the plan: `read {output path}`
2. Create the team and start execution using the orchestration guide in the plan

### Manual Execution Alternative

If agent teams is not available, execute sequentially:
1. Work through Wave 1 tasks in parallel using Task tool subagents
2. Feed Wave 1 outputs into Wave 2 tasks
3. Synthesize in Wave 3

PHASE_7_CHECKPOINT:

  • Summary displayed to user
  • Team composition table shown
  • Execution instructions provided
  • Output file path clearly communicated

Success Criteria

  • QUESTION_PARSED: Research question extracted and validated
  • DOMAIN_CLASSIFIED: Primary and supporting domains identified
  • DECOMPOSED: 3-7 independent sub-questions with dependency mapping
  • TEAM_DESIGNED: Each researcher has name, focus, spawn prompt, output format, completion criteria
  • TASKS_PLANNED: All tasks have IDs, assignees, dependencies, acceptance criteria
  • PLAN_WRITTEN: Research plan file created with all required sections
  • SENTINEL_SET: State file written for stop hook validation
  • USER_INFORMED: Summary with execution instructions displayed

© Wirasm, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in .claude/skills/prp-research-team of Wirasm/prp.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 4352925

Compare with similar skills

Prp Research Team next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Prp Research Team compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Prp Research Team this skillWirasm/prp2.3k—~4.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Proposal AgentOpenRSI-Foundation/OpenRSI-Index207—~5.1kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Idea Generationvoidful/academic-skills135—~1.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Research Ideationmaxwell2732/paper-replicate-agent-demo1371 repos~914Automated safety check: PassNone
Interview Mepedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow1.7k—~1.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Research Ideationpedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow1.7k—~1.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Proposal Agent

    OpenRSI-Foundation/OpenRSI-Index

    A skill your agent uses when a contributor wants to create, repair, or complete an OpenRSI-Index AutoResearch task proposal grounded in a remote model-development repository, including…

    207 GitHub stars~5.1k tokensUpdated today
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Idea Generation

    voidful/academic-skills

    學術研究的 Idea 產生技能——從發散到收斂,系統化地產出高品質研究構想。當使用者想腦力激盪研究方向、找新 research idea、或問「我接下來可以做什麼研究」時,一定要使用此技能。觸發詞包括:brainstorm、想 idea、研究方向、下一步做什麼、有什麼可以研究的、找 gap、research proposal。適用於任何階段的學術研究構想生成。

    135 GitHub stars~1.6k tokensUpdated 6 mo ago
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Research Ideation

    maxwell2732/paper-replicate-agent-demo

    Generate structured research questions, testable hypotheses, and empirical strategies from a topic or dataset

    137 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~914 tokens
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Interview Me

    pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow

    Interactive interview that formalizes a fuzzy research idea into a structured spec (RQ, hypotheses, identification, data needs, empirical strategy).

    1.7k GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated 12 days ago
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Research Ideation

    pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow

    Generate structured research questions, testable hypotheses, and candidate empirical strategies from a topic, phenomenon, or dataset description.

    1.7k GitHub stars~1.7k tokensUpdated 12 days ago
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Light Idea Generation

    Light0305/Light-skills

    Light 科研主线第 3 步·提 idea:从模糊方向/数据/文献结构化发散(激发算子系统生成,不是泛泛头脑风暴) → 产值得做且做得成的分层候选 idea(moonshot 冲刺/solid 稳妥/safe 保底),每个必答为什么值得做·创新点· 比现有强在哪·解决什么具体问题·能投什么层次,且提出时就自带撞车前置自查(最像的前作+delta,吃上游 literature-search…

    640 GitHub stars~4.6k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed

More from Wirasm/prp

All 37 skills in this repo
  • PRP Loop

    Wirasm/prp

    Runs the plan, implement and review pipeline detached in fresh headless sessions, looping review and fix until the pull request is clean.

    2.3k GitHub stars~894 tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Runs a detached, resumable loop that plans, implements, opens a PR, reviews and fixes a feature across headless CLI sessions until the review is clean.

    2.3k GitHub stars~863 tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Coordinates several PRP workstreams in isolated Git worktrees from one session, verifying proof, holding merge gates and sequencing the merges.

    2.3k GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Turns a PRD, issue or description into an implementation-ready plan grounded in codebase evidence, adding root-cause analysis for bugs and publishing issue plans back to the issue.

    2.3k GitHub stars~4.1k tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • PRP Plan

    Wirasm/prp

    Writes an implementation-ready plan for a feature, bug fix, refactor or chore from a PRD, issue or description, grounded in codebase evidence, and can post it back to the source issue.

    2.3k GitHub stars~4k tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • PRP Spike

    Wirasm/prp

    Settles a feasibility question with the smallest throwaway build that could disprove it, in an isolated worktree, ending in a verdict backed by evidence instead of a PR.

    2.3k GitHub stars~3.8k tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Prp Research Team

What does Prp Research Team do?

Design a dynamic research team and plan using agent teams -- analyzes question, composes team, creates executable research plan. Prp Research Team is an agent skill from Wirasm/prp. Design a dynamic research team and plan using agent teams -- analyzes question, composes team, creates executable research plan.

When should I use Prp Research Team?

Prp Research Team fits situations like: the user wants to plan multi-agent research on a question; invokes /prp-research-team.

How do I install Prp Research Team in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add Wirasm/prp --skill prp-research-team -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (.claude/skills/prp-research-team in Wirasm/prp) into .claude/skills/prp-research-team in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Prp Research Team in Codex?

Run `npx skills add Wirasm/prp --skill prp-research-team -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (.claude/skills/prp-research-team in Wirasm/prp) into .agents/skills/prp-research-team in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Prp Research Team in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add Wirasm/prp --skill prp-research-team -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/prp-research-team, .gemini/skills/prp-research-team, .github/skills/prp-research-team and .opencode/skills/prp-research-team in your project.

What does Prp Research Team need to run?

Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Prp Research Team needs the command-line tools its instructions call (git).

Does Prp Research Team access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Its commands use git, which can reach the network depending on how they are called. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Prp Research Team safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Prp Research Team use?

Prp Research Team is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Prp Research Team use?

About 4.9k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 20k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Prp Research Team?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Prp Research Team: Proposal Agent (OpenRSI-Foundation/OpenRSI-Index, 207 stars), Idea Generation (voidful/academic-skills, 135 stars), Research Ideation (maxwell2732/paper-replicate-agent-demo, 137 stars) and Interview Me (pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow, 1.7k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Prp Research Team?

Wirasm (a GitHub user) maintains it in Wirasm/prp, which has 2,258 GitHub stars. The repository holds 37 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 2, 2026.

Source: Wirasm/prp on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.