--- name: document-triage description: Scope a document research task, prioritize sources, and define an evidence-driven reading plan license: MIT compatibility: opencode metadata: audience: analysts workflow: research stage: triage --- ## What I do - Define the research objective in precise terms - Break the task into answerable sub-questions - Identify which documents are likely primary, secondary, or low-value - Propose a reading order based on expected relevance - Highlight likely evidence types such as requirements, decisions, risks, assumptions, and timelines - Create a focused plan before deep reading begins ## When to use me Use this skill at the start of a document-based research task. Examples: - You have a folder of policies, specs, meeting notes, or reports and need a systematic approach - You need to answer a question using internal documentation - You need to map a large corpus before extracting evidence - You want to avoid reading everything in full ## Inputs I expect Provide as many of these as available: - Research goal or question - List of documents, filenames, or brief descriptions - Any constraints such as deadline, topic boundaries, time period, or required output - Any known "must-cover" documents - Preferred output format if already defined ## Workflow 1. Restate the research objective in one sentence 2. Convert the objective into focused sub-questions 3. Classify available documents by likely value: - Primary source - Supporting source - Background source - Likely irrelevant 4. Identify expected signal in each source: - Requirements - Decisions - Responsibilities - Risks - Dates or milestones - Definitions - Exceptions 5. Recommend an efficient reading order 6. Define extraction criteria for the next stage 7. Flag ambiguities, missing sources, and review risks ## Output format Produce these sections: ### Research Objective A single concise statement of the exact question to answer. ### Sub-questions A numbered list of focused questions the research should resolve. ### Source Triage For each document: - Document name - Classification - Why it matters - What to look for ### Reading Plan A prioritized reading sequence with rationale. ### Extraction Criteria A checklist of evidence worth capturing in the next phase. ### Risks and Gaps Explicitly list missing documents, unclear scope, and likely blind spots. ## Quality bar - Be specific, not generic - Prefer primary documents over commentary - Do not assume a document is authoritative unless the user says so - Separate fact-finding from interpretation - Explicitly note what cannot be determined yet ## Do not - Do not summarize the documents in depth at this stage - Do not invent document contents - Do not claim conclusions before evidence extraction - Do not merge assumptions with facts ## Hand-off to companion skills After this skill, use: - `evidence-extraction` to pull structured findings - `research-synthesis` to produce a final answer, brief, matrix, or report