ktg-plugin-marketplace/plugins/ultraplan-local/templates/research-brief-template.md

---
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