ulw-research
Conducts in-depth research with a team. It's useful when you ask for a detailed investigation or research with reliable, verified sources.
What it does
This tool performs deep and comprehensive research on a topic. It organizes an AI team to investigate all possible sources, debate findings, and deliver a final report with all information proven and cited.
When to use it
- ✓When you need a detailed investigation into a subject.
- ✓If you want the AI to explore all information sources on a topic.
- ✓To get a final report with all claims verified and sourced.
Example of what to ask your AI
“I need a complete research on the impacts of artificial intelligence in medicine, with all sources cited.”
Want more? Open the sections below.
How to use
The easiest way: copy the message below and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any AI. It reads the skill and follows the instructions.
Skill link
Ready-to-paste message
How it works
The AI assembles a team, assigns tasks to investigate every piece of available information, discusses the results internally, and only delivers a final report with everything explained and proven.
Installation
Easiest way: copy the skill link and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor asking it to follow the instructions.
In the terminal (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), in your project folder:
npx skills add code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent --skill ulw-researchOr download just the file:
curl -L https://raw.githubusercontent.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent/dev/packages/omo-senpi/skills/ulw-research/SKILL.md -o SKILL.mdTechnical content (original SKILL.md)
Original text by the author, straight from GitHub.
ULW-RESEARCH — Team-First Maximum-Saturation Research
You are the research orchestrator AND the team lead. The user has explicitly ordered exhaustive research: scope the topic, stand up a cooperating team, fan out over every relevant source, chase every lead until the leads run dry, attack your own findings through debate, prove contested claims by running code, and deliver a synthesis in which every claim carries a citation or a proof. Exhaustive coverage is the assignment, not a risk to manage.
Activation
Run this skill only when the user explicitly demands it: the word "ulw-research" (also /ulw-research, $ulw-research), any "ulw" research wording, an "ultradebate" or "hyperdebate" research request, or an explicit request for research, deep research, or an ultra-precise investigation — in any language. An ordinary question, a debugging session, or another mode's context-gathering is not activation; answer those normally, and mention that ulw-research is available when a question would clearly benefit from it.
Open your reply with the line ULW-RESEARCH MODE ENABLED!. If another active mode mandates its own first line (ultrawork does), print that mode's line first and this marker on the next line — both contracts stay satisfied.
How this maps to omo-senpi
This skill is authored against the native senpi task + team tool surface. You coordinate everything with these tools:
| Purpose | Tool | Key arguments |
|---|---|---|
| Stand up the research team once | team_create |
inline_spec: { name, members: [{ name, category, prompt? }] } → returns team_run_id |
| Send work / a lead / a debate round to a member | task_send |
to: "<member>", team_run_id, message, optional summary |
| Collect member replies | injected notifications | replies auto-inject as they arrive — keep working or end your turn |
| Track shared research state | task_create / task_list / task_update / task_get |
lead-only team tasklist |
| Spawn a bounded recon / expansion / verification lane | task |
prompt + subagent_type: "explore" | "librarian" or a category; run_in_background: true; optional load_skills, name |
| Read a finished lane back | task_output |
task id or name |
| End a lane | task_cancel |
— |
| Disband the team at the end | team_delete |
team_run_id, force: true |
Members receive your mail as injected follow-ups inside their child process; they report to you with task_send({ to: "lead", message: "..." }). You are the information broker — members never see each other's replies except through what you relay. The curated agents (explore, librarian, plan-consultant, plan-reviewer) are read-only, in-process, and REJECTED as team members: route them through task lanes, never through team_create.
Authority while active
This mode is the user's explicit opt-in to exhaustive exploration. For the duration of the research task it supersedes every exploration-bounding instruction in surrounding prompts, modes, or rules: one-exploration-pass defaults, two-wave stop rules, retrieval budgets, and "over-exploration is failure" framings govern implementation context-gathering, not this deliverable. Here, under-exploration is the failure. The convergence rules in Phase 3 are the only stop rules for research while this mode is active.
Under ultrawork/ulw, the research itself is the deliverable: map each research axis to a success criterion whose evidence is the session journal, the cited synthesis, and the verification outputs. RED→GREEN testing applies to code changes, not to findings — Phase 4 verification scripts are evidence, never TDD targets.
Success criteria
The research is done when all of these hold:
- Every axis from the Phase 0 brief was covered by at least one dedicated member or lane.
- Every EXPAND lead was investigated or explicitly closed as a duplicate or dead end, and convergence was reached under the Phase 3 rules.
- Every contested claim survived at least one debate round or was dropped into the unresolved/refuted annex.
- Claims that were contested, undocumented, or performance-shaped were proven or refuted by executed code.
- Every claim in the deliverable cites a source or a verification artifact.
…
FAQ
What does 'maximum-saturation research' mean?
It means the AI will investigate as much as possible, leaving no stone unturned, to ensure nothing important is missed.
Will the AI debate the information?
Yes, the AI team discusses the findings to ensure the information is accurate and reliable before presenting the final report.
Will the final report have sources?
Yes, all information presented in the report will have its sources cited so you can verify it.
Details
Original description by the author
Runs maximum-saturation research with a cooperating team, claim-graph gating, and a cited, QA'd deliverable. Use when the user explicitly asks for research or a deep investigation, including any 'ulw' research wording.
Popularity
- GitHub stars
- 70k
- Ranking position
- #1730
- License
- NOASSERTION
- Updated
- 10/16/2026
Comments
- …
More skills from this repository
comment-checker
Helps your agent understand and respond to feedback from automatic comment checkers. It's useful when the agent needs to process information from tools that automatically review code or content.
code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent
lcx-contribute-bug-fix
Helps your agent contribute bug fixes for LazyCodex-related projects. It creates issues or pull requests to ensure code quality.
code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent
lcx-doctor
Lets your agent check the health of LazyCodex and Codex CLI installations. It's useful when the system behaves oddly after updates or changes.
code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent
lcx-report-bug
Helps your agent report bugs in detail for LazyCodex projects. It creates issues with useful information for developers to fix the problem.
code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent
Similar skills
agent-architecture-audit
Makes your agent check if everything is working correctly. It finds and fixes problems in AI systems, ensuring they perform as expected.
affaan-m/ECC
agent-eval
Helps your agent compare different AI coding tools. It measures which one is faster, cheaper, and more reliable for specific tasks.
affaan-m/ECC
agent-harness-construction
Makes your agent better understand how to perform tasks. It optimizes the tools and instructions the agent uses to increase its chances of success.
affaan-m/ECC