Skill: leadingot/opusflame-deep-research (version 2.0.0)

--- name: deep-research description: "Autonomous multi-model deep research with framework-driven reasoning. Spawns 4 parallel model agents (Gemini 2.5 Pro, o3, Opus, MiniMax), each applies best-practice frameworks to the question, then merges into a cross-validated final report. Use when: (1) user asks for in-depth research, (2) 'research X' or 'deep dive on X', (3) complex questions requiring multiple sources. NOT for: simple factual lookups." --- # Deep Research (Multi-Model + Framework-Driven) Autonomous research system that runs 4 AI models in parallel, each applying relevant analytical frameworks, then cross-validates and merges findings into a comprehensive cited report. ## Architecture ``` User Question │ ▼ ┌─ Phase 0: Framework Selection ─┐ │ Identify best-practice │ │ framework(s) for this question │ └────────────┬────────────────────┘ │ ┌───────┼───────┐───────┐ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ Gemini o3 Opus MiniMax 2.5 Pro 4 M2.5 (search (deep (nuance (China/ heavy) logic) +balance)alt view) │ │ │ │ └───────┼───────┘───────┘ ▼ Phase 5: Merge & Cross-Validate │ ▼ Final Report (PDF) ``` ## Phase 0: Framework Selection (MANDATORY — before any research) Before researching, ask: **"Is there a best-practice framework for answering this type of question?"** ### Framework Lookup Table | Question Type | Frameworks to Apply | |---|---| | **Competitive strategy** | Porter's Five Forces, 7 Powers (Helmer), Schwerpunkt/High Ground (Packy), SWOT | | **Market entry / sizing** | TAM/SAM/SOM, Blue Ocean Strategy, Jobs-to-be-Done | | **Business model evaluation** | Business Model Canvas, Unit Economics, Ramp vs Route test (point solution vs platform?) | | **Investment / valuation** | DCF, Comparable Analysis, Venture method, Power Law thesis | | **Product strategy** | JTBD, Kano Model, Value Prop Canvas, Hook Model | | **Growth / GTM** | AARRR Pirate Metrics, Bullseye Framework, STP (Segmentation-Targeting-Positioning) | | **Technology assessment** | Gartner Hype Cycle, Wardley Maps, Build vs Buy matrix | | **Risk analysis** | Pre-Mortem, FMEA, Scenario Planning | | **Organizational / ops** | OKR analysis, RACI, Theory of Constraints | | **Pricing** | Van Westendorp, Conjoint, Value-based pricing framework | | **Industry analysis** | Value Chain Analysis, Industry Lifecycle, Winner-Takes-More thesis | | **Person / hiring** | Track Record Analysis, Reference Triangle, Founder-Market Fit | **If a framework applies:** - Include it in the prompt to each model - Structure the model's analysis around the framework's components - The final report should explicitly reference which framework(s) were used and why **If no standard framework applies:** - State "No standard framework identified — using first-principles analysis" - Each model reasons from first principles with explicit assumptions stated ## Phase 1: Decompose (30s) Break the topic into 5-8 research sub-questions. Think like an investigative journalist: - What are the key facts? - What are different perspectives/sources? - What's the timeline/history? - What data/evidence exists? - What are the unknowns or controversies? ## Phase 2: Spawn 4 Model Agents (Parallel) Spawn 4 sub-agents using `sessions_spawn`, each with a different model: ``` Model 1: gemini (google/gemini-2.5-pro) — Search-heavy, broad coverage Model 2: o3 (openai/o3) — Deep logical reasoning, contrarian Model 3: opus (anthropic/claude-opus-4-6) — Nuanced, balanced synthesis Model 4: minimax (minimax/MiniMax-M2.5) — Alternative perspectives, China/grey-area ``` ### Prompt Template for Each Model ``` ## Research Task [Topic] ## Framework You MUST structure your analysis using: [Framework Name] Apply each component of the framework systematically to the topic. If data is missing for a component, note it explicitly. ## Sub-Questions [List of 5-8 sub-questions] ## Instructions 1. Use web_search extensively (minimum 10 unique searches) 2. Use web_fetch to read full articles for key sources 3. Cross-reference claims across 2+ sources 4. Structure findings around the framework components 5. Flag disagreements, unknowns, and low-confidence claims 6. Minimum 15 unique source URLs 7. Output format: markdown with inline citations [1][2]... 8. End with a Sources section listing all URLs ## Quality Rules - Every factual claim needs a source - Prefer primary sources (filings, official reports) over secondary - Note source freshness — flag anything >6 months old - Include opposing viewpoints - State confidence level (high/medium/low) for key conclusions ``` ### Model-Specific Instructions - **Gemini**: "You are the primary search engine. Cast the widest net. Find obscure sources others would miss. Prioritize data and numbers." - **o3**: "You are the deep reasoner. Challenge assumptions. Look for logical flaws in conventional wisdom. Apply the framework with maximum rigor. If the consensus is wrong, explain why." - **Opus**: "You are the synthesizer. Balance multiple perspectives fairly. Identify nuance others miss. Connect dots across disciplines." - **MiniMax**: "You are the alternative perspective agent. Consider non-Western viewpoints, grey areas, unconventional strategies. What would a Chinese entrepreneur or contrarian investor do differently?" ## Phase 3: Wait for Completion All 4 models run in parallel via `sessions_spawn` with `mode="run"`. Do NOT poll in a loop — they auto-announce when done. ## Phase 4: Collect Individual Reports Save each model's output: ``` memory/research/[topic]-gemini-[date].md memory/research/[topic]-o3-[date].md memory/research/[topic]-opus-[date].md memory/research/[topic]-minimax-[date].md ``` ## Phase 5: Cross-Validate & Merge This is the most critical phase. The primary agent (you) must: ### 5a. Agreement Matrix Create a matrix of key claims and which models agree/disagree: ```markdown | Claim | Gemini | o3 | Opus | MiniMax | Confidence | |-------|--------|----|----|---------|------------| | [claim 1] | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | High (3/4) | | [claim 2] | ✅ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | High (3/4) | | [claim 3] | ✅ | ✅ | ❓ | ❓ | Medium (2/4) | ``` ### 5b. Conflict Resolution For each disagreement: - Identify the root cause (different data? different logic? different framework interpretation?) - Check which model has the stronger source - If genuinely uncertain, present both sides in the final report ### 5c. Framework Synthesis - Map findings back to the framework structure - Ensure every framework component has been addressed - Note which components had strong consensus vs. disagreement ### 5d. Error Catching From experience, models commonly get wrong: - Platform-specific limits (posting frequency, API limits) - Pricing (especially for niche tools — often 10-30x off) - Regulatory details - Recency of data **Verify any quantitative claim that only one model makes.** ## Phase 6: Final Report ```markdown # [Topic] — Deep Research Report **Framework Used**: [Name] — [why this framework] **Models**: Gemini 2.5 Pro, o3, Opus 4, MiniMax M2.5 **Date**: [date] **Total Searches**: [count across all models] ## Executive Summary 3-5 sentence overview. Note consensus level. ## Framework Analysis ### [Framework Component 1] Analysis with model consensus noted. [1][2] ### [Framework Component 2] ... ## Key Findings (Beyond Framework) Discoveries that don't fit neatly into the framework. ## Model Disagreements Where models diverged and why. ## Agreement Matrix [The table from 5a] ## Data & Evidence Tables, numbers, comparisons. ## Risks / Unknowns What we couldn't confirm. Low-confidence areas. ## Conclusion & Recommendations Actionable takeaways ranked by confidence. ## Sources [1] Title — URL [2] ... ``` ## Phase 7: Deliver 1. Save final report to `memory/research/[topic]-终极版-[date].md` 2. Generate PDF via pymupdf and save to `~/.openclaw/media/outbound/` 3. Send PDF to user via message tool ## Quality Standards - **Minimum sources**: 15 unique URLs per model (60+ total across 4 models) - **Source diversity**: No more than 3 citations from same domain per model - **Freshness**: Prefer sources < 6 months old; flag older data - **Cross-validation**: Key claims must appear in 2+ models' findings - **Framework compliance**: Every framework component must be addressed - **Confidence scoring**: High (3-4 models agree + strong sources), Medium (2 models or weak sources), Low (1 model or no source) - **No hallucination**: Every factual claim must have a source ## Adaptation by Topic Type ### Financial / Stock Research - Frameworks: DCF, Comparable Analysis, Power Law - Check SEC/regulatory filings, earnings transcripts - Include key metrics (revenue, margins, P/E, debt) - See `references/financial-research.md` ### Market / Industry Research - Frameworks: Porter's Five Forces, TAM/SAM/SOM, 7 Powers - Competitive landscape, key players, market share - Apply Winner-Takes-More thesis where relevant ### Strategy / Business Model - Frameworks: Schwerpunkt/High Ground, Business Model Canvas, JTBD - Identify the constraint, the scarce asset, expansion path - Compare to historical precedents (Rockefeller, Ramp, etc.) ### Technical / Product Research - Frameworks: Wardley Maps, Build vs Buy, Gartner Hype Cycle - Architecture, benchmarks, alternatives matrix - Community sentiment (GitHub, HN, Reddit)

path: references/financial-research.md
content: # Financial Research Reference

## Priority Sources (by reliability)

1. **Regulatory filings**: SEC EDGAR, Companies House (UK), SEDAR (Canada)
2. **Exchange data**: LSE RNS announcements, NYSE filings
3. **Earnings transcripts**: Seeking Alpha, The Motley Fool transcripts
4. **Analyst reports**: Visible Alpha, TipRanks, MarketBeat consensus
5. **Financial data**: Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, Finnhub, GuruFocus
6. **News**: Reuters, Bloomberg, FT, WSJ
7. **Community**: r/investing, r/wallstreetbets, StockTwits (sentiment only, not facts)

## Key Metrics to Collect

### Valuation
- Market cap, P/E (trailing & forward), P/S, P/B, EV/EBITDA

### Profitability
- Revenue + YoY growth, gross margin, operating margin, net margin, FCF

### Balance Sheet
- Cash, total debt, D/E ratio, current ratio, quick ratio

### Momentum
- 52-week range, % from high/low, RSI, short interest

### Ownership
- Institutional %, insider transactions (last 6 months), major holders

## UK-Listed Companies (AIM/LSE)

- Primary source: Investegate (investegate.co.uk) for RNS announcements
- Companies House for filings: find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk
- AIM companies report H1 + Full Year (no quarterly requirement)
- Watch for: trading updates, director dealings, significant shareholder notices

## Search Patterns

```
# SEC filings
site:sec.gov "[company name]" 10-K OR 10-Q

# UK RNS
site:investegate.co.uk "[company name]"

# Earnings transcripts
site:seekingalpha.com "[ticker]" earnings call transcript

# Analyst consensus
"[ticker]" analyst "price target" consensus

# Insider trades
"[ticker]" insider buying OR selling 2026
```


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: suspicious (MEDIUM)