Files
msd-core/get-shit-done/templates/research-project/SUMMARY.md
Lex Christopherson c54071ccb8 refactor: unify milestone flow, remove deprecated commands
Consolidate /gsd:new-milestone to mirror /gsd:new-project:
- questioning → research (optional) → requirements → roadmap

BREAKING CHANGES:
- Remove /gsd:discuss-milestone (consolidated into new-milestone)
- Remove /gsd:create-roadmap (integrated into project/milestone flows)
- Remove /gsd:define-requirements (integrated into project/milestone flows)
- Remove /gsd:research-project (integrated into project/milestone flows)

Deleted files:
- commands/gsd/{discuss-milestone,create-roadmap,define-requirements,research-project}.md
- get-shit-done/workflows/{discuss-milestone,create-roadmap,define-requirements}.md
- get-shit-done/templates/milestone-context.md

Updated references in:
- progress.md, complete-milestone.md, help.md
- complete-milestone workflow, continuation-format.md
- questioning.md, requirements.md template, SUMMARY.md template
- gsd-project-researcher.md, gsd-roadmapper.md
- README.md

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-01-17 00:28:41 -06:00

4.3 KiB

Research Summary Template

Template for .planning/research/SUMMARY.md — executive summary of project research with roadmap implications.

# Project Research Summary

**Project:** [name from PROJECT.md]
**Domain:** [inferred domain type]
**Researched:** [date]
**Confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]

## Executive Summary

[2-3 paragraph overview of research findings]

- What type of product this is and how experts build it
- The recommended approach based on research
- Key risks and how to mitigate them

## Key Findings

### Recommended Stack

[Summary from STACK.md — 1-2 paragraphs]

**Core technologies:**
- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]
- [Technology]: [purpose] — [why recommended]

### Expected Features

[Summary from FEATURES.md]

**Must have (table stakes):**
- [Feature] — users expect this
- [Feature] — users expect this

**Should have (competitive):**
- [Feature] — differentiator
- [Feature] — differentiator

**Defer (v2+):**
- [Feature] — not essential for launch

### Architecture Approach

[Summary from ARCHITECTURE.md — 1 paragraph]

**Major components:**
1. [Component] — [responsibility]
2. [Component] — [responsibility]
3. [Component] — [responsibility]

### Critical Pitfalls

[Top 3-5 from PITFALLS.md]

1. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
2. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]
3. **[Pitfall]** — [how to avoid]

## Implications for Roadmap

Based on research, suggested phase structure:

### Phase 1: [Name]
**Rationale:** [why this comes first based on research]
**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
**Addresses:** [features from FEATURES.md]
**Avoids:** [pitfall from PITFALLS.md]

### Phase 2: [Name]
**Rationale:** [why this order]
**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]
**Uses:** [stack elements from STACK.md]
**Implements:** [architecture component]

### Phase 3: [Name]
**Rationale:** [why this order]
**Delivers:** [what this phase produces]

[Continue for suggested phases...]

### Phase Ordering Rationale

- [Why this order based on dependencies discovered]
- [Why this grouping based on architecture patterns]
- [How this avoids pitfalls from research]

### Research Flags

Phases likely needing deeper research during planning:
- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "complex integration, needs API research"]
- **Phase [Y]:** [reason — e.g., "niche domain, sparse documentation"]

Phases with standard patterns (skip research-phase):
- **Phase [X]:** [reason — e.g., "well-documented, established patterns"]

## Confidence Assessment

| Area | Confidence | Notes |
|------|------------|-------|
| Stack | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
| Features | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
| Architecture | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |
| Pitfalls | [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW] | [reason] |

**Overall confidence:** [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]

### Gaps to Address

[Any areas where research was inconclusive or needs validation during implementation]

- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]
- [Gap]: [how to handle during planning/execution]

## Sources

### Primary (HIGH confidence)
- [Context7 library ID] — [topics]
- [Official docs URL] — [what was checked]

### Secondary (MEDIUM confidence)
- [Source] — [finding]

### Tertiary (LOW confidence)
- [Source] — [finding, needs validation]

---
*Research completed: [date]*
*Ready for roadmap: yes*

Executive Summary:

  • Write for someone who will only read this section
  • Include the key recommendation and main risk
  • 2-3 paragraphs maximum

Key Findings:

  • Summarize, don't duplicate full documents
  • Link to detailed docs (STACK.md, FEATURES.md, etc.)
  • Focus on what matters for roadmap decisions

Implications for Roadmap:

  • This is the most important section
  • Directly informs roadmap creation
  • Be explicit about phase suggestions and rationale
  • Include research flags for each suggested phase

Confidence Assessment:

  • Be honest about uncertainty
  • Note gaps that need resolution during planning
  • HIGH = verified with official sources
  • MEDIUM = community consensus, multiple sources agree
  • LOW = single source or inference

Integration with roadmap creation:

  • This file is loaded as context during roadmap creation
  • Phase suggestions here become starting point for roadmap
  • Research flags inform phase planning