researchlisted

# research ## When to use A question worth more than one search — including "find what contradicts what", which is this skill with an adversarial brief, not a separate one. ## Method 1. Decompose the question into 3–6 angles that would disagree with each other. Say how many sub-agents that is before starting; 10 concurrent is the ceiling. 2. Each sub-agent searches the project only and returns findings in the block form `CLAIM: / EVIDENCE: "<quote>" / SOURCE_TYPE: / SOURCE:`, one per finding, `SOURCE` pointing into `raw/`. 3. Collect into `scratch/`, then `magi verify <the scratch/ file you just wrote> --project-dir . --json`. Unverified findings are reported as unverified, in their own section — never merged into the rest. 4. Every finding that has a truth value becomes a proposition: `magi thread new <slug> --kind proposition --title "<name>" --claim "<statement>" --purpose "<why>"`. A contradiction is one proposition with both sources posted to it, which puts it on the decision queue where a person will see it. 5. At most one long-form output: `wiki/topics/<slug>.md` with `type: synthesis`. If there is nothing to synthesise, the propositions are the result. 6. `magi validate <the synthesis>`, then `magi lint --fix`. ## Rules - **Never** report a synthesis as complete when an angle returned nothing. Name the angle that came back empty; a **partial** sweep read as whole is the failure this whole pipeline is arranged against. - **Never** let