Research Skill (Stage 0)

This skill performs archaeological rescue to reconstruct lost context from abandoned software projects.

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• Project has been abandoned for 6+ months
• Original developers are unavailable
• Documentation is severely outdated
• "Why was this built?" is unclear
• Need to determine if project should be revived, pivoted, or archived

Output Structure

project/
├── .gt/
│   └── research/
│       ├── timeline.json      # Project evolution timeline
│       └── rescue.json        # Analysis and recommendation
└── [existing project files]

Phase 1: Git Archaeology

Commit History Analysis

# View first commits (original vision)
git log --reverse --format="%h %ad %s" --date=short | head -20

# Identify contributors
git shortlog -sn --all

# Find activity patterns
git log --format="%ad" --date=format:"%Y-%m" | sort | uniq -c

# Locate milestones
git tag -l --sort=-creatordate | head -10

Key Questions to Answer

1. When did work start? - First commit date
2. Who contributed? - Contributor list and commit counts
3. When did work stop? - Last commit date
4. What were the milestones? - Tags, releases, major commits

Phase 2: Timeline Construction

Build a timeline from git history:

Output: timeline.json

{
  "$schema": "timeline-v1",
  "project": {
    "inception": "2024-01-15",
    "last_active": "2024-08-22",
    "dormant_since": "2024-08-22"
  },
  "milestones": [
    {
      "date": "2024-01-15",
      "event": "Project created",
      "commit": "abc1234",
      "significance": "high"
    },
    {
      "date": "2024-03-01",
      "event": "v1.0 released",
      "tag": "v1.0.0",
      "significance": "high"
    }
  ],
  "activity_phases": [
    {
      "period": "2024-01 to 2024-03",
      "level": "high",
      "description": "Initial development sprint"
    },
    {
      "period": "2024-04 to 2024-06",
      "level": "medium",
      "description": "Feature expansion"
    },
    {
      "period": "2024-07 to 2024-08",
      "level": "low",
      "description": "Maintenance only"
    }
  ],
  "contributors": [
    {
      "name": "Developer A",
      "commits": 147,
      "first_commit": "2024-01-15",
      "last_commit": "2024-06-30"
    }
  ]
}

Phase 3: Mission Extraction

Sources to Analyze

1. First README version

   git show $(git rev-list --max-parents=0 HEAD):README.md
   

2. Package description

   • package.json description field
   • pyproject.toml description
   • Cargo.toml description

3. Early commit messages

   git log --reverse --oneline | head -20
   

4. Initial issues/PRs (if GitHub)

   gh issue list --state all --limit 20 --json number,title,createdAt
   

Mission Statement Format

Extract or infer a mission statement:

[Project] helps [target user] to [core action] by [key mechanism].

Example: "TaskFlow helps remote teams to track work progress by providing real-time collaborative task boards."

Phase 4: Drift Analysis

Drift Factors to Identify

Drift Severity Assessment

Phase 5: Health Assessment

Areas to Evaluate

1. Tests

   • Do tests exist?
   • Do they pass?
   • What's coverage like?

2. Dependencies

   • Are deps up-to-date?
   • Any security vulnerabilities?
   • Any deprecated packages?

3. Documentation

   • Does README reflect current state?
   • Are setup instructions valid?
   • Is architecture documented?

4. Architecture

   • Clear directory structure?
   • Consistent patterns?
   • Reasonable complexity?

Phase 6: Rescue Recommendation

Decision Framework

Is the original mission still relevant to users today?
├── No → Is the codebase valuable for a different purpose?
│   ├── No → ARCHIVE
│   └── Yes → PIVOT
└── Yes → Is revival feasible?
    ├── No (too much debt, dead deps) → ARCHIVE
    └── Yes → REVIVE

Recommendation Actions

Output: rescue.json

{
  "$schema": "rescue-v1",
  "mission": {
    "statement": "A task management app for distributed teams",
    "confidence": "high",
    "source": "README.md (initial commit)"
  },
  "timeline": {
    "inception": "2024-01-15",
    "last_active": "2024-08-22",
    "dormant_days": 157
  },
  "drift": {
    "factors": ["scope_creep", "team_departure"],
    "severity": "moderate",
    "analysis": "Project expanded beyond MVP scope without closing core features"
  },
  "health": {
    "tests": "partial",
    "dependencies": "outdated",
    "documentation": "stale",
    "architecture": "reasonable"
  },
  "recommendation": {
    "action": "revive",
    "confidence": "medium",
    "rationale": "Core value proposition remains valid, technical debt is manageable",
    "prerequisites": [
      "Update dependencies to address 3 high-severity vulnerabilities",
      "Close or archive 5 abandoned feature branches",
      "Revise README to reflect current state"
    ]
  },
  "evidence": {
    "files_analyzed": ["README.md", "package.json", "CHANGELOG.md", ".github/"],
    "commits_reviewed": 147,
    "analysis_date": "2026-01-27T10:00:00Z"
  }
}

Quality Gates

Validation

python plugins/lisa/hooks/validate.py --stage research

Next Steps

After research completes:

• REVIVE: Proceed to Stage 1 (Discover) → skills/discover/SKILL.md
• PIVOT: Proceed to Stage 1 with adjusted scope
• ARCHIVE: Stop pipeline, document archival decision