<!-- Powered by BMAD™ Core -->

# Research Quality Checklist

## Pre-Research Planning

### Research Objective Clarity

- [ ] Research objective is specific and measurable
- [ ] Success criteria are clearly defined
- [ ] Scope boundaries are explicitly stated
- [ ] Decision context and impact are understood
- [ ] Timeline and priority constraints are documented

### Research Strategy Design

- [ ] Multi-perspective approach is appropriate for complexity
- [ ] Domain specializations are properly assigned
- [ ] Research team size matches scope and timeline
- [ ] Potential overlap between perspectives is minimized
- [ ] Research methodologies are appropriate for objectives

### Prior Research Review

- [ ] Research log has been searched for related work
- [ ] Prior research relevance has been assessed
- [ ] Strategy for building on existing work is defined
- [ ] Duplication prevention measures are in place

## During Research Execution

### Source Quality and Credibility

- [ ] Sources are credible and authoritative
- [ ] Information recency is appropriate for topic
- [ ] Source diversity provides multiple viewpoints
- [ ] Potential bias in sources is identified and noted
- [ ] Primary sources are prioritized over secondary when available

### Research Methodology

- [ ] Research approach is systematic and thorough
- [ ] Domain expertise lens is consistently applied
- [ ] Web search capabilities are effectively utilized
- [ ] Information gathering covers all assigned perspective areas
- [ ] Analysis frameworks are appropriate for domain

### Quality Assurance

- [ ] Key findings are supported by multiple sources
- [ ] Conflicting information is properly documented
- [ ] Uncertainty levels are clearly identified
- [ ] Source citations are complete and verifiable
- [ ] Analysis stays within assigned domain perspective

## Synthesis and Integration

### Multi-Perspective Synthesis

- [ ] Findings from all researchers are properly integrated
- [ ] Convergent insights are clearly identified
- [ ] Divergent viewpoints are fairly represented
- [ ] Conflicts between perspectives are analyzed and explained
- [ ] Gaps requiring additional research are documented

### Analysis Quality

- [ ] Key findings directly address research objectives
- [ ] Evidence supports conclusions and recommendations
- [ ] Limitations and uncertainties are transparently documented
- [ ] Alternative interpretations are considered
- [ ] Recommendations are actionable and specific

### Documentation Standards

- [ ] Executive summary captures key insights effectively
- [ ] Detailed analysis is well-organized and comprehensive
- [ ] Source documentation enables verification
- [ ] Research methodology is clearly explained
- [ ] Classification tags are accurate and complete

## Final Deliverable Review

### Completeness

- [ ] All research questions have been addressed
- [ ] Success criteria have been met
- [ ] Output format matches requestor requirements
- [ ] Supporting documentation is complete
- [ ] Next steps and follow-up needs are identified

### Decision Support Quality

- [ ] Findings directly inform decision-making needs
- [ ] Confidence levels help assess decision risk
- [ ] Recommendations are prioritized and actionable
- [ ] Implementation considerations are addressed
- [ ] Risk factors and mitigation strategies are provided

### Integration and Handoff

- [ ] Results are properly formatted for requesting agent
- [ ] Research log has been updated with new entry
- [ ] Index categorization is accurate and searchable
- [ ] Cross-references to related research are included
- [ ] Handoff communication includes key highlights

## Post-Research Evaluation

### Research Effectiveness

- [ ] Research objectives were successfully achieved
- [ ] Timeline and resource constraints were managed effectively
- [ ] Quality standards were maintained throughout process
- [ ] Research contributed meaningfully to decision-making
- [ ] Lessons learned are documented for process improvement

### Knowledge Management

- [ ] Research artifacts are properly stored and indexed
- [ ] Key insights are preserved for future reference
- [ ] Research methodology insights can inform future efforts
- [ ] Source directories and contacts are updated
- [ ] Process improvements are identified and documented

## Quality Escalation Triggers

### Immediate Review Required

- [ ] Major conflicts between research perspectives cannot be reconciled
- [ ] Key sources are found to be unreliable or biased
- [ ] Research scope significantly exceeds original boundaries
- [ ] Critical information gaps prevent objective completion
- [ ] Timeline constraints threaten quality standards

### Process Improvement Needed

- [ ] Repeated issues with source credibility or access
- [ ] Frequent scope creep or objective changes
- [ ] Consistent challenges with perspective coordination
- [ ] Quality standards frequently not met on first attempt
- [ ] Research effectiveness below expectations

## Continuous Improvement

### Research Process Enhancement

- [ ] Track research effectiveness and decision impact
- [ ] Identify patterns in research requests and optimize approaches
- [ ] Refine domain specialization profiles based on experience
- [ ] Improve synthesis techniques and template effectiveness
- [ ] Enhance coordination methods between research perspectives

### Knowledge Base Development

- [ ] Update research methodologies based on lessons learned
- [ ] Expand credible source directories with new discoveries
- [ ] Improve domain expertise profiles with refined specializations
- [ ] Enhance template structures based on user feedback
- [ ] Develop best practices guides for complex research scenarios