---
name: research-synthesis
description: Synthesize extracted document evidence into a clear, traceable conclusion, brief, or decision-ready report
license: MIT
compatibility: opencode
metadata:
  audience: analysts
  workflow: research
  stage: synthesis
---

## What I do

- Synthesize extracted evidence into a coherent answer
- Build conclusions that remain traceable to source material
- Identify consensus, conflicts, gaps, and unresolved questions
- Produce outputs such as briefs, summaries, comparison matrices, decision memos, and research reports
- Keep factual findings separate from recommendations or interpretation

## When to use me

Use this after evidence has been extracted and structured.

Examples:
- You need a final answer to a document-based research question
- You need an executive summary grounded in source material
- You need a position paper or internal brief
- You need a gap analysis or comparison across documents
- You need a recommendation with explicit evidence support

## Inputs I expect

Provide:
- Research objective
- Extracted evidence table or notes
- Optional comparison table
- Desired output type, such as:
  - summary
  - brief
  - memo
  - report
  - gap analysis
  - comparison matrix
  - recommendation

## Workflow

1. Restate the question being answered
2. Group evidence by theme or sub-question
3. Identify:
   - Supported conclusions
   - Partial support
   - Contradictions
   - Missing evidence
4. Draft findings with explicit traceability
5. Separate:
   - Facts from documents
   - Interpretation
   - Recommendations
6. Produce a final structured output fit for the requested audience
7. End with known limitations and review points

## Output modes

### A) Research Brief
Use for concise decision support.

Structure:
- Question
- Short answer
- Key findings
- Conflicting evidence
- Gaps
- Recommended next step

### B) Research Report
Use for fuller analytical output.

Structure:
- Objective
- Scope
- Method
- Findings by theme
- Evidence-backed conclusion
- Known gaps and limitations
- Appendix with source references

### C) Gap Analysis
Use when comparing required versus documented state.

Structure:
- Assessment topic
- Evidence found
- Gap
- Impact
- Confidence
- Review needed

## Traceability rule

For every substantive conclusion, include a source anchor such as:
- document name
- section or page
- extracted finding number if available

If traceability is weak, say so explicitly.

## Quality bar

- Conclusions must follow from the extracted evidence
- Contradictions must be surfaced, not hidden
- Distinguish "document says" from "my recommendation"
- State limits of the available corpus
- Prefer precise wording over polished vagueness

## Do not

- Do not introduce facts that were not extracted
- Do not overclaim certainty
- Do not bury disagreements between documents
- Do not produce recommendations without showing the evidence basis
- Do not omit limitations

## Companion skill sequence

Recommended sequence:
1. `document-triage`
2. `evidence-extraction`
3. `research-synthesis`

Use all three together for rigorous document-based research with clear traceability.
