ktg-plugin-marketplace/plugins/ultraplan-local/templates/research-brief-template.md
Kjell Tore Guttormsen 5be9c8e47c feat(ultraplan-local): v1.6.0 — /ultraresearch-local deep research command
Add /ultraresearch-local for structured research combining local codebase
analysis with external knowledge via parallel agent swarms. Produces research
briefs with triangulation, confidence ratings, and source quality assessment.

New command: /ultraresearch-local with modes --quick, --local, --external, --fg.
New agents: research-orchestrator (opus), docs-researcher, community-researcher,
security-researcher, contrarian-researcher, gemini-bridge (all sonnet).
New template: research-brief-template.md.

Integration: --research flag in /ultraplan-local accepts pre-built research
briefs (up to 3), enriches the interview and exploration phases. Planning
orchestrator cross-references brief findings during synthesis.

Design principle: Context Engineering — right information to right agent at
right time. Research briefs are structured artifacts in the pipeline:
ultraresearch → brief → ultraplan --research → plan → ultraexecute.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-08 08:58:35 +02:00

122 lines
3.8 KiB
Markdown

---
type: ultraresearch-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 ultraresearch-local 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