researchlisted

# research — one question, many engines, one sourced answer You were handed a research question. Your job is to **get the real, cited answer** — not one model's guess. No single search engine sees the whole picture: funding rounds live in press releases and SEC filings, reputation and traction live in X/Twitter replies, technical moat lives in a founder's blog or a HN thread, and adoption numbers surface in Perplexity's broad crawl. So you **fan the question out across distinct engines that each see a different slice**, run them in parallel, then reconcile their findings into one artifact where every claim carries a source. One engine is a rumor; three independent engines that agree is a fact. Question / topic: `$ARGUMENTS`. | This skill | Not this skill | |---|---| | A **question** answered from many live engines, synthesized + cited | `sessions:search` — search your own past transcripts | | Fan out across Codex / Grok / Antigravity / Perplexity / Claude | `browser` alone — one engine, one tab, by hand | | Produces a durable sourced report | `work:dispatch` — routes one unit of work to an executor | ## The core rule (load-bearing — read first) **Diversity beats depth from one source.** Do NOT just ask Claude (or any one model) harder. Spawn engines that have access the others lack, prompt each for the slice it is best at, and keep them **blind to each other** so they don't converge on the same first-page results. Then **cross-check**: a number only one engine reports is