research

Delegate noisy investigation to one or more subagents so the orchestrator's context stays clean, then work from the distilled answer. Use this skill whenever answering a question would require reading many files, long logs, large diffs, or wide codebase surveys — i.e. when producing the answer generates far more noise than the answer itself. Use it for "how does X work", "where is Y used", "what's the root cause of Z", "summarize this PR/log" style questions, and reach for it liberally...

npx skills add https://github.com/warpdotdev/common-skills --skill research

Research

Use this skill to answer a question by delegating the work of finding the answer to a subagent, so that the byproducts of that work — file contents, log noise, dead-end reads — never enter your own context. You get back a distilled answer plus the evidence that supports it, and you stay sharp for the actual task.

Why this matters

Your context window is your most valuable and limited resource. Reading twenty files to discover that three of them mattered permanently pollutes your context with seventeen files of noise, degrading every subsequent decision you make. A subagent absorbs that noise on your behalf and hands you only the signal. Think of it as asking a colleague to dig through the archives and report back, rather than dumping the whole archive on your desk.

When to use it

Reach for research delegation when the cost of producing the answer is far greater than the answer itself. Strong signals:

  • You'd need to read many files to find the few that are relevant.
  • You'd need to wade through long test output, CI logs, or stack traces to extract a failure.
  • You'd need to survey how a pattern, API, or symbol is used across the whole repo.
  • You'd need to read and summarize a large diff or PR.
  • The question has several independent sub-parts that could be investigated separately.

Examples — good fits:

  • "What's the root cause of this failing test?" (the subagent reads the logs and traces the code; you get the cause)
  • "How is SessionManager used across the codebase?" (the subagent greps and reads; you get a summary with call sites)
  • "Summarize what this 4,000-line PR changes and why." (the subagent reads the diff; you get the shape of it)

Examples — do NOT delegate:

  • Reading 2–3 files you already know you need. Just read them directly; delegation adds latency for no context savings.
  • A single grep or one-line lookup. Do it yourself.
  • Anything where you need the raw material for your next step. If you're about to edit the files you'd be reading, delegating is counterproductive — you'd just have to re-read them yourself to make the change. Research delegation pays off when the output is a conclusion, not when it's material you'll work on directly.

The cost of a subagent is real (latency and tokens), so the test is always: does the noise I'd avoid outweigh that cost?

How to do it

Single vs. parallel

Default to a single subagent. Spawn multiple subagents in parallel only when the question genuinely decomposes into independent sub-parts that don't need to share intermediate findings — for example, "how does auth work AND how does billing work AND how does the rate limiter work" are three independent investigations that can run at once. Parallelism is a capability worth using when the parts are truly independent, since separate subagents can investigate simultaneously; but don't force a single coherent question into artificial fragments.

Brief the subagent well

The subagent does not share your intent, so spell it out. A good research brief includes:

  • The exact question to answer.
  • Where to look (repo path, branch, suspected files/symbols if you know them).
  • That it is read-only — it should investigate and report, not modify files, unless the task explicitly calls for changes.
  • The output you want back (see below).

Ask for signal, not transcript

Tell the subagent to return a distilled answer plus its supporting evidence, not a raw dump. Specifically:

  1. The direct answer to the question.
  2. The key evidence: exact file paths and symbols (e.g. src/session.rs:142, fn reconnect), so you can jump straight to what matters.
  3. Anything surprising or any caveats/unknowns it hit.

The whole point is that the noise stays with the subagent. If a report comes back bloated, send a focused follow-up to the same subagent asking it to tighten the answer — it retains its context and can refine cheaply.

After you get the answer

Work from the distilled result. If you later find you need the underlying files to make edits, read them directly at that point — now you know exactly which ones matter, so you read three files instead of twenty.

Lebih banyak skill dari warpdotdev

council
warpdotdev
Jalankan dewan subagen yang beragam model untuk menyelidiki masalah yang sama dari berbagai perspektif, membandingkan temuan, dan menghasilkan rekomendasi akhir. Gunakan keterampilan ini setiap kali pengguna meminta dewan, opini kedua, beberapa agen/model untuk mengevaluasi satu pertanyaan, investigasi paralel, perbandingan tim merah/tim biru, atau bantuan dalam memutuskan antara pendekatan teknis yang bersaing.
researchcommunicationproject-management
spec-driven-implementation
warpdotdev
Jalankan alur kerja berbasis spesifikasi untuk fitur substansial dengan menulis PRODUCT.md sebelum implementasi, menulis TECH.md jika diperlukan, dan memperbarui kedua spesifikasi tersebut seiring perkembangan implementasi. Gunakan saat memulai fitur signifikan, merencanakan implementasi berbasis agen, atau ketika pengguna ingin spesifikasi produk dan teknis dicatat dalam kontrol sumber.
developmentdocumentproject-management
review-pr
warpdotdev
Tinjau perbedaan pull request dan tulis umpan balik terstruktur ke review.json agar alur kerja dapat mempublikasikannya. Gunakan saat meninjau PR yang sudah di-checkout dari artefak lokal seperti pr_diff.txt dan pr_description.txt, serta menghasilkan output tinjauan yang dapat dibaca mesin, bukan memposting langsung ke GitHub.
code-reviewdevelopment
create-pr
warpdotdev
Buat pull request di repositori warp untuk cabang saat ini. Gunakan saat pengguna menyebutkan membuka PR, membuat pull request, mengirimkan perubahan untuk ditinjau, atau menyiapkan kode untuk digabungkan.
developmentcode-review
implement-specs
warpdotdev
Menerapkan fitur yang telah disetujui dari PRODUCT.md dan TECH.md, menjaga spesifikasi dan kode tetap selaras dalam PR yang sama seiring perkembangan implementasi. Gunakan setelah spesifikasi produk dan teknis disetujui dan langkah selanjutnya adalah membangun fitur tersebut.
developmentcode-reviewapi
cross-critique
warpdotdev
Jalankan putaran kedua pada pertanyaan yang diperdebatkan dengan mengedarkan proposal independen setiap subagen kepada penulis lain dan meminta pro dan kontra yang terstruktur, lalu sintesiskan. Gunakan keterampilan ini setiap kali Anda memiliki beberapa proposal atau pendapat independen tentang keputusan yang diperdebatkan — tradeoff arsitektur, perbedaan pendapat dalam tinjauan kode, pilihan desain, teori penyebab akar yang bersaing — dan menginginkan analisis yang lebih tajam daripada yang akan Anda hasilkan dengan mensintesis sendiri. Secara alami berpasangan dengan keterampilan dewan dan penelitian;...
resolve-merge-conflicts
warpdotdev
Resolve Git merge conflicts by extracting only unresolved paths, conflict hunks, and compact diffs instead of loading whole files into context. Use when a merge, rebase, cherry-pick, or stash pop stops on conflicts, when `git status` shows unmerged paths, or when files contain conflict markers.
developmentcode-review
brandalf
warpdotdev
Memandu pembuatan, revisi, dan peninjauan aset bermerek Warp atau Oz. Gunakan saat mengerjakan halaman peluncuran, dokumen, komponen HTML/CSS, purwarupa UI, prompt, aset media sosial, naskah, presentasi, atau materi bermerek lain yang harus terlihat dan terdengar khas Warp atau Oz.
designcreativemarketing