A collection of Claude Code skills, agents, and slash commands by goern.
Turns a single research prompt into three artifacts — a deep-research artifact, a publishable humanized report, and a companion blog post — through parallel multi-agent research, iterative synthesis, citation verification, multi-perspective team review, and a final humanizing pass.
Inspired by Anthropic's multi-agent research system.
Four single-shot reviewer agents that audit a research draft from orthogonal angles:
| Agent | Role |
|---|---|
dr-critic |
Adversarial — load-bearing logical and factual breakage |
dr-skeptic |
Evidence audit — citation quality, source diversity, claim-source fit |
dr-editor |
Structure and clarity — argument reconstructability, narrative scaffolding |
dr-audience |
Reader-fit — does the draft answer the question for the intended reader |
These ship as reusable subagent types. Use them directly via the Agent tool or spawn the whole team with /team:review.
Spawns a 4-teammate review team (dr-critic + dr-skeptic + dr-editor + dr-audience) against any research draft, report, or technical writeup. Synthesizes convergent findings, auto-applies unambiguous patches, surfaces stalemates as open questions.
/team:review research-output/topic-2026-04-28.md
/team:review research-output/topic.md | What are the tradeoffs of X for Y?
Requires CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1 (see Requirements below).
Prompt → Plan → Parallel Research (2-8 subagents) → Synthesis → Gap-Fill →
Citation Verification → Write Artifact → Team Review → Blog Post → Humanize
- Plan — classifies complexity, generates MECE research axes
- Research — spawns parallel subagents, each searching and fetching independently
- Synthesize — merges findings, deduplicates, identifies gaps and contradictions
- Gap-Fill — spawns targeted subagents for missing coverage (max 3 iterations)
- Verify — dedicated CitationAgent checks every claim against its source URL
- Write artifact — produces the deep-research artifact with verification badges
6.5. Team review —
dr-critic+dr-skeptic+dr-editor+dr-audiencereview the artifact, lead synthesizes and auto-applies patches (skipped gracefully if agent teams are not enabled) - Blog post — generates a 1-2 minute first-person companion blog post
- Humanize — produces a publishable report via the
write-like-goernskill (Critical/Analytical register, structure preserved)
Each report uses the Outcomes / Outputs / Results framework and includes a full bibliography with credibility ratings and verification status.
claude plugin marketplaces add https://github.com/goern/goern-skills
claude plugin install goern-skillsOr for development:
claude --plugin-dir /path/to/goern-skillsThe /team:review command and Phase 6.5 of deep-research use Claude Code's experimental agent teams feature. To enable it, set the environment variable in your shell:
export CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1Or via direnv (recommended) — drop a .envrc in the project where you call deep-research:
echo 'export CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1' >> .envrc
direnv allowIf unset, the deep-research skill will skip Phase 6.5 with a one-line note in the plan file and proceed without team review. The pipeline still produces the deep-research artifact, the blog post, and the publishable report — just without the multi-perspective hardening pass.
The Phase 8 humanize pass requires the write-like-goern skill (or any compatible skill named write-like-goern) to be available. If absent, the skill notes the gap and skips humanization.
/goern-skills:deep-research "What is RLHF?"
/goern-skills:deep-research "Compare RAG vs fine-tuning for enterprise LLM deployment"
/goern-skills:deep-research https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.12345
Output is written to ./research-output/:
- Deep research artifact:
<slug>-<date>.md - Publishable report:
<slug>-publishable-<date>.md - Blog post:
<slug>-blog-<date>.md
| Complexity | Subagents | When |
|---|---|---|
| Simple | 1–2 | Single concept, definitional |
| Moderate | 3–4 | Comparison, multi-faceted, emerging field |
| Complex | 5–8 | Cross-domain, controversial, primary sources needed |
- Executive Summary
- Key Findings (with inline citations and verification badges)
- Analysis
- Outcomes / Outputs / Results (hypothesis chain)
- Quotations (verbatim, with verification status)
- Sources / Bibliography (with credibility ratings)
- Methodology (subagents, iterations, gaps)
- Verification Summary (verified / partial / unverified / unavailable)
- Team Review (convergent findings, applied patches, open questions) — when Phase 6.5 ran
.claude-plugin/
plugin.json # Plugin manifest
marketplace.json # Marketplace entry
agents/
dr-critic.md # Adversarial reviewer
dr-skeptic.md # Evidence auditor
dr-editor.md # Structure reviewer
dr-audience.md # Reader-fit reviewer
commands/
team/
review.md # /team:review slash command
skills/
deep-research/
SKILL.md # 8-phase orchestration prompt
references/
output-template.md
blog-post-template.md
research-guide.md