Files
deer-flow/skills/public/github-deep-research/SKILL.md
2026-02-01 10:55:21 +08:00

152 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
---
name: github-deep-research
description: Conduct multi-round deep research on any GitHub Repo. Use when users request comprehensive analysis, timeline reconstruction, competitive analysis, or in-depth investigation of GitHub. Produces structured markdown reports with executive summaries, chronological timelines, metrics analysis, and Mermaid diagrams. Triggers on Github repository URL or open source projects.
---
# GitHub Deep Research Skill
Multi-round research combining GitHub API, web_search, web_fetch to produce comprehensive markdown reports.
## Research Workflow
- Round 1: GitHub API
- Round 2: Discovery
- Round 3: Deep Investigation
- Round 4: Deep Dive
## Core Methodology
### Query Strategy
**Broad to Narrow**: Start with GitHub API, then general queries, refine based on findings.
```
Round 1: GitHub API
Round 2: "{topic} overview"
Round 3: "{topic} architecture", "{topic} vs alternatives"
Round 4: "{topic} issues", "{topic} roadmap", "site:github.com {topic}"
```
**Source Prioritization**:
1. Official docs/repos (highest weight)
2. Technical blogs (Medium, Dev.to)
3. News articles (verified outlets)
4. Community discussions (Reddit, HN)
5. Social media (lowest weight, for sentiment)
### Research Rounds
**Round 1 - GitHub API**
Directly execute `scripts/github_api.py` without `read_file()`:
```bash
python /path/to/skill/scripts/github_api.py <owner> <repo> summary
python /path/to/skill/scripts/github_api.py <owner> <repo> readme
python /path/to/skill/scripts/github_api.py <owner> <repo> tree
```
**Available commands (the last argument of `github_api.py`):**
- summary
- info
- readme
- tree
- languages
- contributors
- commits
- issues
- prs
- releases
**Round 2 - Discovery (3-5 web_search)**
- Get overview and identify key terms
- Find official website/repo
- Identify main players/competitors
**Round 3 - Deep Investigation (5-10 web_search + web_fetch)**
- Technical architecture details
- Timeline of key events
- Community sentiment
- Use web_fetch on valuable URLs for full content
**Round 4 - Deep Dive**
- Analyze commit history for timeline
- Review issues/PRs for feature evolution
- Check contributor activity
## Report Structure
Follow template in `assets/report_template.md`:
1. **Metadata Block** - Date, confidence level, subject
2. **Executive Summary** - 2-3 sentence overview with key metrics
3. **Chronological Timeline** - Phased breakdown with dates
4. **Key Analysis Sections** - Topic-specific deep dives
5. **Metrics & Comparisons** - Tables, growth charts
6. **Strengths & Weaknesses** - Balanced assessment
7. **Sources** - Categorized references
8. **Confidence Assessment** - Claims by confidence level
9. **Methodology** - Research approach used
### Mermaid Diagrams
Include diagrams where helpful:
**Timeline (Gantt)**:
```mermaid
gantt
title Project Timeline
dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD
section Phase 1
Development :2025-01-01, 2025-03-01
section Phase 2
Launch :2025-03-01, 2025-04-01
```
**Architecture (Flowchart)**:
```mermaid
flowchart TD
A[User] --> B[Coordinator]
B --> C[Planner]
C --> D[Research Team]
D --> E[Reporter]
```
**Comparison (Pie/Bar)**:
```mermaid
pie title Market Share
"Project A" : 45
"Project B" : 30
"Others" : 25
```
## Confidence Scoring
Assign confidence based on source quality:
| Confidence | Criteria |
|------------|----------|
| High (90%+) | Official docs, GitHub data, multiple corroborating sources |
| Medium (70-89%) | Single reliable source, recent articles |
| Low (50-69%) | Social media, unverified claims, outdated info |
## Output
Save report as: `research_{topic}_{YYYYMMDD}.md`
### Formatting Rules
- Chinese content: Use full-width punctuation
- Technical terms: Provide Wiki/doc URL on first mention
- Tables: Use for metrics, comparisons
- Code blocks: For technical examples
- Mermaid: For architecture, timelines, flows
## Best Practices
1. **Start with official sources** - Repo, docs, company blog
2. **Verify dates from commits/PRs** - More reliable than articles
3. **Triangulate claims** - 2+ independent sources
4. **Note conflicting info** - Don't hide contradictions
5. **Distinguish fact vs opinion** - Label speculation clearly
6. **Cite inline** - Reference sources near claims
7. **Update as you go** - Don't wait until end to synthesize