📦 deps(thirdparty): update snapshots

2026-05-29 08:33:53 +00:00
parent fdb52f1e96
commit 06e0d13d57
1615 changed files with 232858 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+---
+name: report-findings
+description: This skill should be used when synthesizing multi-source research, presenting findings with attribution, or when "report", "findings", or "synthesis" are mentioned.
+metadata:
+  version: "1.1.0"
+  related-skills:
+    - research
+    - codebase-recon
+    - patterns
+---
+
+# Report Findings
+
+Multi-source gathering → authority assessment → cross-reference → synthesize → present with confidence.
+
+<when_to_use>
+
+- Synthesizing research from multiple sources
+- Presenting findings with proper attribution
+- Comparing options with structured analysis
+- Assessing source credibility
+- Documenting research conclusions
+
+NOT for: single-source summaries, opinion without evidence, rushing to conclusions
+
+</when_to_use>
+
+<source_authority>
+
+| Tier | Confidence | Types | Use For |
+|------|------------|-------|---------|
+| **1: Primary** | 90-100% | Official docs, original research, direct observation | Factual claims, guarantees |
+| **2: Secondary** | 70-90% | Expert analysis, established publications, official guides | Best practices, patterns |
+| **3: Community** | 50-70% | Q&A sites, blogs, wikis, anecdotal evidence | Workarounds, pitfalls |
+| **4: Unverified** | 0-50% | Unattributed, outdated, content farms, unchecked AI | Initial leads only |
+
+See [source-tiers.md](references/source-tiers.md) for detailed assessment criteria.
+
+</source_authority>
+
+<cross_referencing>
+
+## Two-Source Minimum
+
+Never rely on single source for critical claims:
+1. Find claim in initial source
+2. Seek confirmation in independent source
+3. If sources conflict → investigate further
+4. If sources agree → moderate confidence
+5. If 3+ sources agree → high confidence
+
+## Conflict Resolution
+
+When sources disagree:
+1. **Check dates** — newer information often supersedes
+2. **Compare authority** — higher tier beats lower tier
+3. **Verify context** — might both be right in different scenarios
+4. **Test empirically** — verify through direct observation if possible
+5. **Document uncertainty** — flag if unresolved
+
+## Triangulation
+
+For complex questions, seek alignment across:
+- **Official sources** — what should happen
+- **Direct evidence** — what actually happens
+- **Community reports** — what people experience
+
+All three align → high confidence. Mismatches → investigate the gap.
+
+</cross_referencing>
+
+<comparison_analysis>
+
+Three comparison methods:
+
+| Method | When to Use |
+|--------|-------------|
+| **Feature Matrix** | Side-by-side capability comparison |
+| **Trade-off Analysis** | Strengths/weaknesses/use cases per option |
+| **Weighted Matrix** | Quantitative scoring with importance weights |
+
+See [comparison-methods.md](references/comparison-methods.md) for templates and examples.
+
+</comparison_analysis>
+
+<synthesis_techniques>
+
+## Extract Themes
+
+Across sources, identify:
+- **Consensus** — what everyone agrees on
+- **Disagreements** — where opinions differ
+- **Edge cases** — nuanced situations
+
+## Present Findings
+
+1. **Main answer** — clear, actionable
+2. **Supporting evidence** — cite 2-3 strongest sources
+3. **Caveats** — limitations, context-specific notes
+4. **Alternatives** — other valid approaches
+
+</synthesis_techniques>
+
+<confidence_calibration>
+
+| Level | Indicator | Criteria |
+|-------|-----------|----------|
+| **High** | 90-100% | 3+ tier-1 sources agree, empirically verified |
+| **Moderate** | 60-89% | 2 tier-2 sources agree, some empirical support |
+| **Low** | Below 60% | Single source or tier-3 only, unverified |
+
+Flag remaining uncertainties even at high confidence.
+
+</confidence_calibration>
+
+<output_format>
+
+Standard report structure:
+
+```markdown
+## Summary
+{ 1-2 sentence answer }
+
+## Key Findings
+1. {FINDING} — evidence: {SOURCE}
+
+## Comparison (if applicable)
+{ matrix or trade-off analysis }
+
+## Confidence Assessment
+Overall: {LEVEL} {PERCENTAGE}%
+
+## Sources
+- [Source](url) — tier {N}
+
+## Caveats
+{ uncertainties, gaps, assumptions }
+```
+
+See [output-template.md](references/output-template.md) for full template with guidelines.
+
+</output_format>
+
+<rules>
+
+ALWAYS:
+- Assess source authority before citing
+- Cross-reference critical claims (2+ sources)
+- Include confidence levels with findings
+- Cite sources with proper attribution
+- Flag uncertainties
+
+NEVER:
+- Cite single source for critical claims
+- Present tier-4 sources as authoritative
+- Skip confidence calibration
+- Hide conflicting sources
+- Omit caveats when uncertainty exists
+
+</rules>
+
+<references>
+
+- [source-tiers.md](references/source-tiers.md) — detailed authority assessment
+- [comparison-methods.md](references/comparison-methods.md) — comparison templates
+- [output-template.md](references/output-template.md) — full report structure
+
+**Research vs Report-Findings**:
+- `research` skill covers the full investigation workflow using MCP tools
+- This skill (`report-findings`) covers synthesis, source assessment, and presentation
+
+Load this skill during research synthesis stage, or standalone for any task requiring multi-source synthesis with proper attribution.
+
+</references>