export const meta = { name: 'go-in-depth', description: 'Go in depth harness — fan-out web searches, fetch sources, adversarially verify claims, synthesize a cited report.', whenToUse: 'When the user wants a deep, multi-source, fact-checked research report on any topic. BEFORE invoking, check if the question is specific enough to research directly — if underspecified (e.g., "what car to buy" without budget/use-case/region), ask 2-3 clarifying questions to narrow scope. Then pass the refined question as args, weaving the answers in.', phases: [{"title":"Scope","detail":"Decompose question (from args) into 5 search angles"},{"title":"Search","detail":"5 parallel WebSearch agents, one per angle"},{"title":"Fetch","detail":"URL-dedup, fetch top 15 sources, extract falsifiable claims"},{"title":"Verify","detail":"3-vote adversarial verification per claim (need 2/3 refutes to kill)"},{"title":"Synthesize","detail":"Merge semantic dupes, rank by confidence, cite sources"}], } // go-in-depth: Scope → pipeline(Search → URL-dedup → Fetch+Extract) → 3-vote Verify → Synthesize // Uses a bug-hunting-style fan-out and verification pattern, adapted for web research. // Question is passed via Workflow({name: 'go-in-depth', args: ''}). const VOTES_PER_CLAIM = 3 const REFUTATIONS_REQUIRED = 2 const MAX_FETCH = 15 const MAX_VERIFY_CLAIMS = 25 // ─── Schemas ─── const SCOPE_SCHEMA = { type: "object", required: ["question", "angles", "summary"], properties: { question: { type: "string" }, summary: { type: "string" }, angles: { type: "array", minItems: 3, maxItems: 6, items: { type: "object", required: ["label", "query"], properties: { label: { type: "string" }, query: { type: "string" }, rationale: { type: "string" }, }, }}, }, } const SEARCH_SCHEMA = { type: "object", required: ["results"], properties: { results: { type: "array", maxItems: 6, items: { type: "object", required: ["url", "title", "relevance"], properties: { url: { type: "string" }, title: { type: "string" }, snippet: { type: "string" }, relevance: { enum: ["high", "medium", "low"] }, }, }}, }, } const EXTRACT_SCHEMA = { type: "object", required: ["claims", "sourceQuality"], properties: { sourceQuality: { enum: ["primary", "secondary", "blog", "forum", "unreliable"] }, publishDate: { type: "string" }, claims: { type: "array", maxItems: 5, items: { type: "object", required: ["claim", "quote", "importance"], properties: { claim: { type: "string" }, quote: { type: "string" }, importance: { enum: ["central", "supporting", "tangential"] }, }, }}, }, } const VERDICT_SCHEMA = { type: "object", required: ["refuted", "evidence", "confidence"], properties: { refuted: { type: "boolean" }, evidence: { type: "string" }, confidence: { enum: ["high", "medium", "low"] }, counterSource: { type: "string" }, }, } const REPORT_SCHEMA = { type: "object", required: ["summary", "findings", "caveats"], properties: { summary: { type: "string" }, findings: { type: "array", items: { type: "object", required: ["claim", "confidence", "sources", "evidence"], properties: { claim: { type: "string" }, confidence: { enum: ["high", "medium", "low"] }, sources: { type: "array", items: { type: "string" } }, evidence: { type: "string" }, vote: { type: "string" }, }, }}, caveats: { type: "string" }, openQuestions: { type: "array", items: { type: "string" } }, }, } // ─── Phase 0: Scope — decompose question into search angles ─── phase("Scope") const QUESTION = (typeof args === "string" ? args.trim() : args?.query?.trim()) || "" if (!QUESTION) { return { error: "No research question provided. Pass it as args: Workflow({name: 'go-in-depth', args: ''})." } } const scope = await agent( "Decompose this research question into complementary search angles.\n\n" + "## Question\n" + QUESTION + "\n\n" + "## Task\n" + "Generate 5 distinct web search queries that together cover the question from different angles. Pick angles that suit the question's domain. Examples:\n" + "- broad/primary · academic/technical · recent news · contrarian/skeptical · practitioner/implementation\n" + "- For medical: anatomy · common causes · serious differentials · authoritative refs · red flags\n" + "- For tech: state-of-art · benchmarks · limitations · industry adoption · cost/tradeoffs\n\n" + "Make queries specific enough to surface high-signal results. Avoid redundancy.\n" + "Return: the question (verbatim or lightly normalized), a 1-2 sentence decomposition strategy, and the angles.\n\nStructured output only.", { label: "scope", schema: SCOPE_SCHEMA } ) if (!scope) { return { error: "Scope agent returned no result — cannot decompose the research question." } } log("Q: " + QUESTION.slice(0, 80) + (QUESTION.length > 80 ? "…" : "")) log("Decomposed into " + scope.angles.length + " angles: " + scope.angles.map(a => a.label).join(", ")) // ─── Dedup state — accumulates across searchers as they complete ─── const normURL = u => { try { const p = new URL(u) return (p.hostname.replace(/^www\./, "") + p.pathname.replace(/\/$/, "")).toLowerCase() } catch { return u.toLowerCase() } } const seen = new Map() const dupes = [] const budgetDropped = [] const relRank = { high: 0, medium: 1, low: 2 } let fetchSlots = MAX_FETCH // ─── Prompts ─── const SEARCH_PROMPT = (angle) => "## Web Searcher: " + angle.label + "\n\n" + "Research question: \"" + QUESTION + "\"\n\n" + "Your angle: **" + angle.label + "** — " + (angle.rationale || "") + "\n" + "Search query: `" + angle.query + "`\n\n" + "## Task\nUse WebSearch with the query above (or a refined version). Return the top 4-6 most relevant results.\n" + "Rank by relevance to the ORIGINAL question, not just the search query. Skip obvious SEO spam/content farms.\n" + "Include a short snippet capturing why each result is relevant.\n\nStructured output only." const FETCH_PROMPT = (source, angle) => "## Source Extractor\n\n" + "Research question: \"" + QUESTION + "\"\n\n" + "Fetch and extract key claims from this source:\n" + "**URL:** " + source.url + "\n**Title:** " + source.title + "\n**Found via:** " + angle + " search\n\n" + "## Task\n1. Use WebFetch to retrieve the page content.\n" + "2. Assess source quality: primary research/institution? secondary reporting? blog/opinion? forum? unreliable?\n" + "3. Extract 2-5 FALSIFIABLE claims that bear on the research question. Each claim must:\n" + " - be a concrete, checkable statement (not vague generalities)\n" + " - include a direct quote from the source as support\n" + " - be rated central/supporting/tangential to the research question\n" + "4. Note publish date if available.\n\n" + "If the fetch fails or the page is irrelevant/paywalled, return claims: [] and sourceQuality: \"unreliable\".\n\nStructured output only." const VERIFY_PROMPT = (claim, v) => "## Adversarial Claim Verifier (voter " + (v + 1) + "/" + VOTES_PER_CLAIM + ")\n\n" + "Be SKEPTICAL. Try to REFUTE this claim. ≥" + REFUTATIONS_REQUIRED + "/" + VOTES_PER_CLAIM + " refutations kill it.\n\n" + "## Research question\n" + QUESTION + "\n\n" + "## Claim under review\n\"" + claim.claim + "\"\n\n" + "**Source:** " + claim.sourceUrl + " (" + claim.sourceQuality + ")\n" + "**Supporting quote:** \"" + claim.quote + "\"\n\n" + "## Checklist\n" + "1. Is the claim actually supported by the quote, or is it an overreach/misread?\n" + "2. WebSearch for contradicting evidence — does any credible source dispute or heavily qualify this?\n" + "3. Is the source quality sufficient for the claim's strength? (extraordinary claims need primary sources)\n" + "4. Is the claim outdated? (check dates — old claims about fast-moving fields are suspect)\n" + "5. Is this a marketing claim / press release / cherry-picked benchmark / forum speculation?\n\n" + "**refuted=true** if: unsupported by quote / contradicted / low-quality source for strong claim / outdated / marketing fluff.\n" + "**refuted=false** ONLY if: claim is well-supported, current, and source quality matches claim strength.\n" + "Default to refuted=true if uncertain.\n\nStructured output only. Evidence MUST be specific." // ─── Pipeline: search → dedup → fetch+extract (no barrier) ─── const searchResults = await pipeline( scope.angles, angle => agent(SEARCH_PROMPT(angle), { label: "search:" + angle.label, phase: "Search", schema: SEARCH_SCHEMA }).then(r => { if (!r) return null log(angle.label + ": " + r.results.length + " results") return { angle: angle.label, results: r.results } }), searchResult => { const sorted = [...searchResult.results].sort((a, b) => relRank[a.relevance] - relRank[b.relevance]) const novel = sorted.filter(r => { const key = normURL(r.url) if (seen.has(key)) { dupes.push({ ...r, angle: searchResult.angle, dupOf: seen.get(key) }) return false } if (fetchSlots <= 0) { budgetDropped.push({ ...r, angle: searchResult.angle }) return false } seen.set(key, { angle: searchResult.angle, title: r.title }) fetchSlots-- return true }) if (novel.length < searchResult.results.length) { log(searchResult.angle + ": " + novel.length + " novel (" + (searchResult.results.length - novel.length) + " filtered)") } return parallel( novel.map(source => () => { let host = "unknown" try { host = new URL(source.url).hostname.replace(/^www\./, "") } catch {} return agent(FETCH_PROMPT(source, searchResult.angle), { label: "fetch:" + host, phase: "Fetch", schema: EXTRACT_SCHEMA, }).then(ext => { // User-skip → null; drop it (filtered by searchResults.flat().filter(Boolean)) // rather than throwing into .catch() and mislabeling it "unreliable". if (!ext) return null return { url: source.url, title: source.title, angle: searchResult.angle, sourceQuality: ext.sourceQuality, publishDate: ext.publishDate, claims: ext.claims.map(c => ({ ...c, sourceUrl: source.url, sourceQuality: ext.sourceQuality })), } }).catch(e => { log("fetch failed: " + source.url + " — " + (e.message || e)) return { url: source.url, title: source.title, angle: searchResult.angle, sourceQuality: "unreliable", claims: [] } }) }) ) } ) const allSources = searchResults.flat().filter(Boolean) const allClaims = allSources.flatMap(s => s.claims) const impRank = { central: 0, supporting: 1, tangential: 2 } const qualRank = { primary: 0, secondary: 1, blog: 2, forum: 3, unreliable: 4 } const rankedClaims = [...allClaims] .sort((a, b) => (impRank[a.importance] - impRank[b.importance]) || (qualRank[a.sourceQuality] - qualRank[b.sourceQuality])) .slice(0, MAX_VERIFY_CLAIMS) log("Fetched " + allSources.length + " sources → " + allClaims.length + " claims → verifying top " + rankedClaims.length) if (rankedClaims.length === 0) { return { question: QUESTION, summary: "No claims extracted. " + allSources.length + " sources fetched, all empty/failed. " + dupes.length + " URL dupes, " + budgetDropped.length + " budget-dropped.", findings: [], refuted: [], sources: allSources.map(s => ({ url: s.url, quality: s.sourceQuality })), stats: { angles: scope.angles.length, sources: allSources.length, claims: 0, dupes: dupes.length }, } } // ─── Verify: 3-vote adversarial ─── // Barrier here is intentional — claim pool must be fully assembled before ranking/verification. phase("Verify") const voted = (await parallel( rankedClaims.map(claim => () => parallel( Array.from({ length: VOTES_PER_CLAIM }, (_, v) => () => agent(VERIFY_PROMPT(claim, v), { label: "v" + v + ":" + claim.claim.slice(0, 40), phase: "Verify", schema: VERDICT_SCHEMA, }) ) ).then(verdicts => { // A vote can be null (user-skip or agent error) — treat as abstain. const valid = verdicts.filter(Boolean) const refuted = valid.filter(v => v.refuted).length // Survive only if the claim was actually adjudicated: a quorum of // valid votes AND fewer than REFUTATIONS_REQUIRED refuting. Too many // abstentions = unverified, which must NOT pass into the report // (otherwise all-abstain → refuted=0 → false survive). const abstained = VOTES_PER_CLAIM - valid.length const survives = valid.length >= REFUTATIONS_REQUIRED && refuted < REFUTATIONS_REQUIRED log("\"" + claim.claim.slice(0, 50) + "…\": " + (valid.length - refuted) + "-" + refuted + (abstained > 0 ? " (" + abstained + " abstain)" : "") + " " + (survives ? "✓" : "✗")) return { ...claim, verdicts: valid, refutedVotes: refuted, survives } }) ) )).filter(Boolean) const confirmed = voted.filter(c => c.survives) const killed = voted.filter(c => !c.survives) log("Verify done: " + voted.length + " claims → " + confirmed.length + " confirmed, " + killed.length + " killed") if (confirmed.length === 0) { return { question: QUESTION, summary: "All " + voted.length + " claims refuted by adversarial verification. Research inconclusive — sources may be low-quality or claims overstated.", findings: [], refuted: killed.map(c => ({ claim: c.claim, vote: (c.verdicts.length - c.refutedVotes) + "-" + c.refutedVotes, source: c.sourceUrl })), sources: allSources.map(s => ({ url: s.url, quality: s.sourceQuality, claimCount: s.claims.length })), stats: { angles: scope.angles.length, sources: allSources.length, claims: allClaims.length, verified: voted.length, confirmed: 0, killed: killed.length }, } } // ─── Synthesize ─── phase("Synthesize") const confRank = { high: 0, medium: 1, low: 2 } const block = confirmed.map((c, i) => { const best = c.verdicts.filter(v => !v.refuted).sort((a, b) => confRank[a.confidence] - confRank[b.confidence])[0] return "### [" + i + "] " + c.claim + "\n" + "Vote: " + (c.verdicts.length - c.refutedVotes) + "-" + c.refutedVotes + " · Source: " + c.sourceUrl + " (" + c.sourceQuality + ")\n" + "Quote: \"" + c.quote + "\"\nVerifier evidence (" + best.confidence + "): " + best.evidence + "\n" }).join("\n") const killedBlock = killed.length > 0 ? "\n## Refuted claims (for transparency)\n" + killed.map(c => "- \"" + c.claim + "\" (" + c.sourceUrl + ", vote " + (c.verdicts.length - c.refutedVotes) + "-" + c.refutedVotes + ")").join("\n") : "" const report = await agent( "## Synthesis: research report\n\n" + "**Question:** " + QUESTION + "\n\n" + confirmed.length + " claims survived " + VOTES_PER_CLAIM + "-vote adversarial verification. Merge semantic duplicates and synthesize.\n\n" + "## Confirmed claims\n" + block + "\n" + killedBlock + "\n\n" + "## Instructions\n" + "1. Identify claims that say the same thing — merge them, combine their sources.\n" + "2. Group related claims into coherent findings. Each finding should directly address the research question.\n" + "3. Assign confidence per finding: high (multiple primary sources, unanimous votes), medium (secondary sources or split votes), low (single source or blog-quality).\n" + "4. Write a 3-5 sentence executive summary answering the research question.\n" + "5. Note caveats: what's uncertain, what sources were weak, what time-sensitivity applies.\n" + "6. List 2-4 open questions that emerged but weren't answered.\n\nStructured output only.", { label: "synthesize", schema: REPORT_SCHEMA } ) if (!report) { // Synthesis skipped/errored — salvage the verified claims raw rather // than throwing on report.findings and discarding the whole run. return { question: QUESTION, summary: "Synthesis step was skipped or failed — returning " + confirmed.length + " verified claims unmerged.", findings: [], confirmed: confirmed.map(c => ({ claim: c.claim, source: c.sourceUrl, quote: c.quote, vote: (c.verdicts.length - c.refutedVotes) + "-" + c.refutedVotes })), refuted: killed.map(c => ({ claim: c.claim, vote: (c.verdicts.length - c.refutedVotes) + "-" + c.refutedVotes, source: c.sourceUrl })), sources: allSources.map(s => ({ url: s.url, quality: s.sourceQuality, claimCount: s.claims.length })), stats: { angles: scope.angles.length, sources: allSources.length, claims: allClaims.length, verified: voted.length, confirmed: confirmed.length, killed: killed.length, afterSynthesis: 0 }, } } return { question: QUESTION, ...report, refuted: killed.map(c => ({ claim: c.claim, vote: (c.verdicts.length - c.refutedVotes) + "-" + c.refutedVotes, source: c.sourceUrl })), sources: allSources.map(s => ({ url: s.url, quality: s.sourceQuality, angle: s.angle, claimCount: s.claims.length })), stats: { angles: scope.angles.length, sourcesFetched: allSources.length, claimsExtracted: allClaims.length, claimsVerified: voted.length, confirmed: confirmed.length, killed: killed.length, afterSynthesis: report.findings.length, urlDupes: dupes.length, budgetDropped: budgetDropped.length, agentCalls: 1 + scope.angles.length + allSources.length + (voted.length * VOTES_PER_CLAIM) + 1, }, }