[omh] Business research brief - turns a market, competitor, pricing, or customer question into a structured evidence-vs-inference brief; for raw link gathering use ulw-research, and for ongoing multi-role research use research-department.
SkillScore64Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/18/2026
What it changes
Passed 14 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 3 of 22 without it.
Without skill14%
With skill64%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Refrains from claiming raw sources were accessed without observed input data.
Uses practitioner heuristic, upstream official, or unattributed for source class.
Uses practitioner heuristic, upstream official, or unattributed for source origins.
and 22 more in the full report
11 fixed3 passed either way8 still failing0 broke
Pass-rate lift
+50 pp
Tokens
+18%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-3%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/18/2026v314 of 22 cases passed with skill
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 11 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 11
Prompt
Can you conduct a business research brief comparing top product onboarding analytics vendors for mid-market mobile apps? Clearly state the central research query and source boundaries at the beginning, construct a structured table listing claims against source origins and dates, provide a separate summary of inferred insights, and include a confidence score with missing retrieval gaps identified.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Includes source class, confidence, and unresolved conflict as individual fields within every evidence row.
Missed
Passed
Uses upstream official, practitioner heuristic, or unattributed to classify source origins.
Missed
Passed
Maintains a strict distinction between observed source claims and inferred market trends.
Passed
Passed
case-03 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/18/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md108 linessingle file
Research Brief
This is a Hermes-native research-brief workflow skill.
Why This Exists
research-brief exists to keep research work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.
Do Not Use When
The request is only fresh links, citations, or current facts without a business question or decision audience; use research.
Sources have not yet been selected and the user wants source types, candidates, or acquisition state; use source-finder.
Examples
Good example:
Prompt: research-brief: compare three onboarding analytics vendors using customer notes and confidence gaps.
Expected behavior: Prepare a source-backed brief with evidence, inference, confidence, and retrieval gaps separated.
Why: The user needs business research synthesis, not recurring operations or coding.
Bad example:
Prompt: research-brief: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing research-brief.
Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.
Completion Checklist
The research question, source boundaries, recency assumptions, and confidence level are named.
Observed sources, inference, synthesis, and unresolved retrieval gaps are separated.
Follow-up planning or handoff uses the research summary without calling it execution evidence.
Recovery Notes
If sources cannot be accessed, state the retrieval gap and use only observed local context.
If evidence is thin or one-sided, lower confidence and ask for a narrower source boundary.