--- type: trekresearch-brief created: {YYYY-MM-DD} question: "{research question}" confidence: {0.0-1.0} dimensions: {N} mcp_servers_used: [{list}] local_agents_used: [{list}] external_agents_used: [{list}] --- # {Research Question Title} > Generated by trekresearch v{version} on {YYYY-MM-DD} ## Research Question {The full research question as clarified during interview.} ## Executive Summary {3 sentences maximum. The answer, the confidence level, and the key caveat.} ## Dimensions *Each dimension represents one facet of the research question, explored by both local and external agents. Confidence is rated per dimension.* ### {Dimension Name} -- Confidence: {high | medium | low | contradictory} **Local findings:** - {Finding with source citation (file path or agent name)} **External findings:** - {Finding with source citation (URL)} **Contradictions:** - {If local and external disagree, explain both sides with evidence. Omit this sub-section if no contradictions exist for this dimension.} *Repeat for each dimension.* ## Local Context *Findings from codebase analysis agents. Omit sub-sections where no relevant findings exist.* ### Architecture {Architecture patterns, tech stack, relevant components from architecture-mapper} ### Dependencies {Import chains, data flow, external integrations from dependency-tracer} ### Conventions {Coding patterns, naming, test conventions from convention-scanner} ### History {Recent changes, code ownership, hot files from git-historian} ## External Knowledge *Findings from external research agents. Omit sub-sections where no relevant findings exist.* ### Best Practice {Official documentation, recommended patterns from docs-researcher} ### Alternatives {Other approaches, competing solutions from community-researcher + contrarian-researcher} ### Security {CVEs, audit history, supply chain risks from security-researcher} ### Known Issues {Common pitfalls, gotchas, real-world problems from community-researcher} ## Gemini Second Opinion *Independent research result from Gemini Deep Research. Provides a second perspective for triangulation. Omit this section if gemini-bridge was not used or was unavailable.* {Gemini findings reformatted into key findings, sources cited, and areas of agreement/disagreement with other agents.} ## Synthesis *Cross-cutting insights that emerge from combining local and external knowledge. This is NOT a summary of the sections above. It is NEW insight from triangulation -- things that only become visible when local context meets external knowledge.* {Example: "The codebase uses pattern X (local), but best practice has shifted to pattern Y (external). However, our dependency on Z (local) makes a direct migration impractical -- a hybrid approach using Y for new code while maintaining X for existing modules is the pragmatic path."} ## Open Questions *Things that remain unresolved after research. Each is a candidate for follow-up research or an assumption to carry forward.* - {Question 1 -- why it remains open} - {Question 2 -- why it remains open} ## Recommendation *If the research was decision-relevant, provide a concrete recommendation with reasoning. If the research was exploratory (understanding, not deciding), omit this section entirely.* {Recommendation with rationale, citing specific findings from above.} ## Sources | # | Source | Type | Quality | Used in | |---|--------|------|---------|---------| | 1 | {URL or codebase path} | {official / community / codebase / gemini} | {high / medium / low} | {dimension name} | *Quality assessment:* - **high** — official documentation, verified codebase analysis, peer-reviewed - **medium** — reputable community source, well-maintained blog, established project - **low** — unverified, outdated (>1 year), single-source claim, opinion piece