Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索可写文件clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计提醒

deep-research-pipeline深入的研究管道

Agent Skill

deep-research-pipeline 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

1,656

周安装

67

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

520
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:deep-research-pipeline(深入的研究管道)
来源仓库:https://github.com/vardhineediganesh877-ui/deep-research-pipeline
安装命令:
openclaw skills install deep-research-pipeline
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install deep-research-pipeline

简介

深度研究管道采用反射循环提升信息挖掘深度。

  • 适用于学术研究、专利检索或政策演变分析。
  • 结合 LLM 块选择优化内容相关性。deep-research-pipeline 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。
  • 运行周期较长,建议在非高峰时段部署。
  • 需确保系统具备足够的内存处理中间结果缓存。

SKILL.md

name
deep-research
version
2.0.1
description
Multi-stage deep research with reflection loops, multi-query retrieval, LLM chunk selection, and citation integrity. Use when: deep research, literature review, topic investigation, multi-source analysis, fact-checking, competitive analysis, technology deep-dives.

Deep Research Pipeline

Deep Research Pipeline turns broad questions into cited, publication-quality reports through a staged research workflow: planning, multi-query retrieval, chunk selection, analysis, reflection, writing, and optional verification.

It is designed for research that should not be answered from memory or a single search result. The pipeline keeps claims tied to sources, surfaces contradictions, tracks gaps, and can resume from checkpoints.

Why Use It

  • Multi-stage research, not one-shot summarization — separate researcher, analyst, reflection, and writer stages.
  • Citation integrity — findings and final claims trace back to URLs/sources.
  • Reflection loops — the pipeline checks coverage and decides whether another cycle is needed.
  • Portable LLM config — supports LLM_API_KEY/LLM_API_BASE, OpenAI-compatible endpoints, or Z.AI GLM.
  • Operational controls — checkpoint/resume, time limits, token budgets, output formats, and mock mode.

When to Use

Deep research, comprehensive analysis, literature reviews, competitive analysis, fact-checking, technology deep-dives — anything needing multiple sources, synthesis, and verified citations.

Quick Start

cd skills/deep-research

# Optional: configure any OpenAI-compatible provider
export LLM_API_KEY="your-key"
export LLM_API_BASE="https://api.example.com/v1"
export LLM_MODEL="your-model"

# Or use OpenAI-compatible env names
export OPENAI_API_KEY="your-key"
export OPENAI_BASE_URL="https://api.example.com/v1"

# Run a report
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py \
  "Compare Vercel, Netlify, and Cloudflare Pages in 2026" \
  --max-cycles 2 \
  --format report \
  --output report.md

# Test without API calls
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "test question" --mock --output report.md

If no universal/OpenAI-compatible variables are set, the skill still supports Z.AI via ZAI_API_KEY and ZAI_API_ENDPOINT.

Architecture

ORCHESTRATOR (you)
    │
    ├── Plan → Decompose question into research dimensions
    │
    ├── REFLECTION LOOP (0-8 cycles)
    │   ├── Researcher Agent (parallel) → multi-query search + chunk selection
    │   ├── Analyst Agent → dedupe + themes + contradictions
    │   └── Reflection → coverage check, gap analysis, continue decision
    │
    ├── Writer Agent → polished report (report/summary/brief/json)
    │
    └── Verify (optional) → adversarial fact-check

Key principle: Orchestrator NEVER searches directly. Clean output flows between stages only.

Two Modes

Mode 1: Full Pipeline CLI (Recommended)

Use the enhanced research_pipeline.py for automated end-to-end research:

# Full research with all features
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "What is the state of quantum computing in 2026?" \
    --max-cycles 3 \
    --output report.md \
    --format report

# Mock mode (no API calls, for testing)
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "test question" --mock --output report.md

# With budget limits
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "question" \
    --max-cycles 3 --time-limit 300 --token-limit 40000

# Resume from checkpoint
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "question" \
    --resume checkpoint.json --output report.md

# Explicit dimensions
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "question" \
    --dimensions architecture benchmarks limitations \
    --output report.md --format summary

CLI Flags:

FlagDefaultDescription
--max-cycles3Max research cycles (1-8)
--mockfalseUse mock data, no API calls
--output / -ostdoutOutput file path
--format / -freportOutput format: report, summary, brief, json
--time-limit900Max seconds for entire pipeline
--token-limit60000Max estimated tokens
--checkpointnoneSave checkpoints to path
--resumenoneResume from checkpoint file
--dimensionsautoExplicit research dimensions
--no-parallelfalseResearch dimensions sequentially

Output formats:

  • report — Full markdown: Executive Summary → Key Findings → Detailed Analysis → Contradictions → Gaps → Sources → Methodology
  • summary — Executive summary + top 5 findings + sources
  • brief — Bullet-point format for quick scanning
  • json — Structured JSON with annotated findings and metadata

Mode 2: Orchestrated Sub-Agents (For complex research)

Use when you need fine-grained control over each stage or parallel dimension research with sub-agents.

Workflow (Orchestrated Mode)

Phase 1: Planning

  • Analyze question, create slug, make memory/research/<slug>/ directory
  • Generate research plan with dimensions and questions
  • Save to plan.md

Phase 2: Research Cycle (repeat up to 8 times)

Step A: Spawn Researcher Agent(s)

Use sessions_spawn with a task brief (NOT the full query):

{
  "dimension": "technical architecture",
  "specific_questions": ["How does X work?", "What are Y's components?"],
  "context_limit": 5000,
  "max_sources": 10
}

Researcher agent does:

  1. Multi-query generationscripts/query_generator.py produces 3-5 variants
  2. Parallel searchweb_search for each variant
  3. Content fetchingweb_fetch for top results
  4. LLM chunk selectionscripts/chunk_selector.py scores each chunk (≥0.7)
  5. Context expansionscripts/context_expander.py fetches surrounding content
  6. Output: JSON findings with citations

Can spawn 2-3 researcher agents in parallel for different dimensions.

Step B: Spawn Analyst Agent

After researcher(s) complete, spawn analyst with their combined output:

  1. Deduplicate overlapping findings
  2. Flag contradictions (explicit + implicit)
  3. Group into thematic clusters
  4. Identify gaps
  5. Output: Cleaned JSON + gap list

Step C: Run Reflection

After analyst completes, run scripts/reflection.py:

  1. What's covered? (themes + confidence scores)
  2. What gaps remain? (unanswered questions)
  3. What contradictions emerged?
  4. New directions discovered?
  5. Should continue? (coverage ≥ 0.8 + minor gaps → stop)

Save reflection to memory/research/<slug>/reflection-cycle-N.md

Continue Decision

  • Coverage ≥ 0.8 AND gaps minor → proceed to Phase 3
  • Major contradictions → spawn targeted researcher
  • Significant gaps → another researcher cycle
  • Hard stop at cycle 8

Phase 3: Write Report

Use the Writer Agent (scripts/writer.py) for publication-quality output:

# From Python
from writer import WriterAgent, OutputFormat, write_report

# Generate report using WriterAgent
agent = WriterAgent(use_llm=True)
result = agent.write_report(
    analyst_output,           # from analyst or run_analyst()
    question="What is RAG?",
    fmt=OutputFormat.REPORT,
)

# Or use convenience function
result = write_report(analyst_output, question, fmt="report")

# Save to file
from writer import save_report
save_report(result, "output/report.md")

Report features:

  • 🟢🟡🟠🔴 Confidence indicators on every finding
  • [source_url] inline citations throughout
  • ⚠️ Contradiction callout boxes where sources disagree
  • Structured sections: Summary → Findings → Analysis → Contradictions → Gaps → Sources → Methodology
  • Template-based fallback when no LLM available

Phase 4: Verify (optional sub-agent)

Spawn adversarial verifier:

  • Anchor every claim to source
  • Verify URLs with web_fetch
  • Remove unsourced claims
  • Save to review.md

Phase 5: Deliver

  • Fix any FATAL issues from review
  • Copy to final.md
  • Write provenance.md (date, cycles, sources, verification status)
  • Send summary to user

Python API

import sys, os
sys.path.insert(0, os.path.expanduser("~/.openclaw/workspace/skills/deep-research/scripts"))

from research_pipeline import run_enhanced_pipeline

result = run_enhanced_pipeline(
    question="What is the state of quantum computing in 2026?",
    max_cycles=3,
    dimensions=["hardware", "algorithms", "applications", "challenges"],
    mock_mode=False,
    output_format="report",
    time_limit=900,
    token_limit=60000,
    checkpoint_path="checkpoint.json",    # auto-saves progress
    parallel_dimensions=True,             # parallel research per dimension
)

# result["report"] = markdown string
# result["cycles_completed"] = int
# result["final_coverage"] = float (0.0-1.0)
# result["metadata"] = dict with timing, findings count, etc.

Scripts

ScriptPurposeUsage
research_pipeline.pyFull pipeline orchestrationpython3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "question" --max-cycles 3
query_generator.pyGenerate 3-5 search query variantspython3 scripts/query_generator.py -q "..."
chunk_selector.pyLLM scores chunks, filters by thresholdpython3 scripts/chunk_selector.py -q "..." -c chunks.json
context_expander.pyFetch surrounding context for incomplete chunkspython3 scripts/context_expander.py -s selected.json -q "..."
reflection.pyMandatory gap/contradiction checkpython3 scripts/reflection.py -q "..." -f findings.json -c 1
writer.pyPublication-quality report generationfrom writer import WriterAgent, write_report
analyst.pyDedup + themes + contradictions (no API needed)from analyst import analyze_findings
researcher.pyMulti-source research orchestrationfrom researcher import research, research_dimension
research_sources.pySearch adapters (web, GitHub, docs)from research_sources import WebSearchSource
fact-checker.pyClaim extraction + source rankingpython3 scripts/fact-checker.py "text" --sources '["url1"]'

All LLM-enabled scripts use the shared provider-agnostic llm_client.py.

Provider resolution order:

  1. LLM_API_KEY + LLM_API_BASE + optional LLM_MODEL
  2. OPENAI_API_KEY + OPENAI_API_BASE / OPENAI_BASE_URL + optional OPENAI_MODEL
  3. ZAI_API_KEY + optional ZAI_API_ENDPOINT / GLM_MODEL

If no key is configured, use --mock for local pipeline testing or rely on scripts with rule-based fallbacks where available.

Examples

Example 1: Quick Competitive Analysis

python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py \
    "Compare Vercel vs Netlify vs Cloudflare Pages features and pricing 2026" \
    --max-cycles 2 \
    --dimensions features pricing performance ecosystem \
    --format summary \
    --output competitive-analysis.md

Example 2: Deep Technology Research

python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py \
    "What is the current state of AI agent frameworks?" \
    --max-cycles 4 \
    --time-limit 600 \
    --token-limit 80000 \
    --checkpoint /tmp/ai-agents-checkpoint.json \
    --format report \
    --output ai-agents-research.md

Example 3: Literature Review (mock mode for testing)

python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py \
    "What does the research say about transformer architecture efficiency?" \
    --mock \
    --max-cycles 3 \
    --format report \
    --output literature-review.md

Example 4: Bullet Brief for Quick Scanning

python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py \
    "What are the latest developments in Rust web frameworks?" \
    --max-cycles 2 \
    --format brief \
    --output rust-web-brief.md

Example 5: JSON Output for Programmatic Use

python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py \
    "What is the market size of edge computing?" \
    --max-cycles 2 \
    --format json \
    --output edge-computing-data.json

Integration with Night Shift

To queue research plans for Night Shift execution:

  1. Create a research plan file:
// memory/research/queued/<slug>.json
{
  "question": "What is the state of quantum computing in 2026?",
  "max_cycles": 3,
  "dimensions": ["hardware", "algorithms", "applications"],
  "output_format": "report",
  "output_path": "memory/research/quantum-2026/final.md",
  "time_limit": 600,
  "created_at": "2026-04-25T06:00:00Z"
}
  1. Night Shift picks up queued plans and runs them via:
python3 scripts/research_pipeline.py "$QUESTION" \
    --max-cycles $MAX_CYCLES \
    --dimensions $DIMENSIONS \
    --format $FORMAT \
    --output $OUTPUT_PATH \
    --time-limit $TIME_LIMIT
  1. Results are saved to memory/research/<slug>/final.md with provenance metadata.

File Layout

memory/research/<slug>/
├── plan.md                    # Research plan with dimensions
├── reflection-cycle-1.md      # Reflection after each cycle
├── reflection-cycle-2.md
├── researcher-output-*.json   # Raw researcher findings
├── analyst-output.json        # Merged/deduped findings
├── draft.md                   # First draft
├── brief.md                   # Verified brief
├── review.md                  # Adversarial review (optional)
├── final.md                   # Final report
├── provenance.md              # Metadata + source verification status
└── checkpoint.json            # Pipeline checkpoint (auto-saved)

Quick Mode

Skip sub-agents and the full pipeline. Do 5-10 searches yourself. Still use evidence tables, verify URLs, cite sources. Shorter, inline in chat.

Integrity Commandments

  1. Never fabricate a source — no URL = don't mention it
  2. Never claim existence without checking
  3. Never extrapolate unread details
  4. Read before summarizing
  5. No fake certainty — never say "verified" unless checked
  6. Never invent numbers/benchmarks/comparisons
  7. Separate observations from inferences
  8. Every claim traces to a source — citation integrity is mandatory
  9. Reflection is not optional — run it after every cycle
  10. Stage separation — orchestrator never searches, researchers never see full plan

Scale Decision

  • Single fact → Quick Mode (3-10 tool calls, no sub-agents)
  • 2-3 item comparison → 2 parallel researcher sub-agents, 2-3 cycles
  • Broad/multi-faceted → 3-4 researcher sub-agents, 3-5 cycles
  • PhD-level deep dive → 4+ researchers, 5-8 cycles

See Also

  • DOCS.md — Full API reference, architecture diagrams, troubleshooting
  • test_integration.py — 29 integration tests covering the full pipeline
  • test_pipeline.py — 26 unit tests for individual components

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

OpenClaw

85.23%
按下载量换算443

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

可疑

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

可写文件

该 Skill 可能写入或修改本地文件,使用前需要确认目标目录和修改范围。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills