Files
claude-code-skills-reference/deep-research/references/counter_review_team_guide.md
daymade 6d261ce801 feat(deep-research): V6.1 source accessibility policy and Counter-Review Team
- Correct source accessibility: distinguish circular verification (forbidden)
  from exclusive information advantage (encouraged)
- Add Counter-Review Team with 5 specialized agents (claim-validator,
  source-diversity-checker, recency-validator, contradiction-finder,
  counter-review-coordinator)
- Add Enterprise Research Mode: 6-dimension data collection framework
  with SWOT, competitive barrier, and risk matrix analysis
- Update version to 2.4.0
- Add comprehensive reference docs:
  - source_accessibility_policy.md
  - V6_1_improvements.md
  - counter_review_team_guide.md
  - enterprise_analysis_frameworks.md
  - enterprise_quality_checklist.md
  - enterprise_research_methodology.md
  - quality_gates.md
  - report_template_v6.md
  - research_notes_format.md
  - subagent_prompt.md

Based on "深度推理" case study methodology lessons learned.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-04 09:15:17 +08:00

182 lines
5.6 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# Counter-Review Team 使用指南
Deep Research V6 P6 阶段的专用 Agent Team并行执行多维度审查。
## Team 架构
```
counter-review-coordinator (协调者)
├── claim-validator (声明验证器)
├── source-diversity-checker (来源多样性检查器)
├── recency-validator (时效性验证器)
└── contradiction-finder (矛盾发现器)
```
## Agent 职责
| Agent | 职责 | 输出 |
|-------|------|------|
| **claim-validator** | 验证声明准确性,识别无证据/弱证据声明 | Claim Validation Report |
| **source-diversity-checker** | 检查单一来源依赖source-type 分布 | Source Diversity Report |
| **recency-validator** | 验证时敏声明的新鲜度AS_OF 合规 | Recency Validation Report |
| **contradiction-finder** | 发现内部矛盾,缺失的反向观点 | Contradiction and Bias Report |
| **counter-review-coordinator** | 整合所有报告,生成最终 P6 报告 | P6 Counter-Review Report |
## 使用流程
### 1. 准备输入材料
在 P5 (Draft) 完成后,收集以下材料:
```
inputs/
├── draft_report.md # P5 起草的报告
├── citation_registry.md # P3 的引用注册表
├── task-notes/
│ ├── task-a.md # 子代理研究笔记
│ ├── task-b.md
│ └── ...
└── p0_config.md # P0 配置 (AS_OF 日期, Mode 等)
```
### 2. 并行分发任务
向 4 个 specialist agent 同时发送任务:
```bash
# 向 claim-validator 发送
SendMessage to: claim-validator
输入: draft_report.md + citation_registry.md + task-notes/
指令: 验证所有声明的证据支持
# 向 source-diversity-checker 发送
SendMessage to: source-diversity-checker
输入: draft_report.md + citation_registry.md
指令: 检查来源多样性和单一来源依赖
# 向 recency-validator 发送
SendMessage to: recency-validator
输入: draft_report.md + citation_registry.md + p0_config.md
指令: 验证时敏声明的新鲜度
# 向 contradiction-finder 发送
SendMessage to: contradiction-finder
输入: draft_report.md + task-notes/ + citation_registry.md
指令: 发现矛盾和缺失的反向观点
```
### 3. 协调汇总
等待 4 个 specialist 完成后,发送给 coordinator
```bash
SendMessage to: counter-review-coordinator
输入:
- Claim Validation Report
- Source Diversity Report
- Recency Validation Report
- Contradiction and Bias Report
指令: 整合所有报告,生成最终 P6 Counter-Review Report
```
### 4. 获取最终输出
Coordinator 输出包含:
- 问题汇总(必须 ≥3 个)
- 关键争议部分(可直接复制到最终报告)
- 强制修复清单
- 质量门状态
## 质量门要求
| 检查项 | 标准模式 | 轻量模式 | 失败处理 |
|--------|---------|---------|---------|
| 发现问题数 | ≥3 | ≥3 | 重新审查 |
| 关键声明单来源 | 0 | 0 | 补充来源或降级 |
| 官方来源占比 | ≥30% | ≥20% | 补充官方来源 |
| AS_OF 日期完整 | 100% | 100% | 补充日期 |
| 核心争议文档化 | 必填 | 必填 | 补充争议部分 |
## 输出示例
### Coordinator 最终报告结构
```markdown
# P6 Counter-Review Report
## Executive Summary
- Total issues found: 7 (critical: 2, high: 3, medium: 2)
- Must-fix before publish: 2
- Recommended improvements: 5
## Critical Issues (Block Publish)
| # | Issue | Location | Source | Fix Required |
|---|-------|----------|--------|--------------|
| 1 | 市场份额声明无来源 | 3.2节 | 无 | 补充来源或删除 |
| 2 | 单一社区来源支持收入数据 | 4.1节 | [12] community | 找官方来源替代 |
## 核心争议 / Key Controversies
- **争议 1:** 公司声称增长 50% vs 分析师报告增长 30%
- 证据强度: official(公司财报) vs academic(第三方研究)
- 建议: 并列呈现两种数据,说明差异原因
## Mandatory Fixes Checklist
- [ ] 补充 3.2 节市场份额来源
- [ ] 替换 4.1 节收入数据来源
- [ ] 添加 AS_OF: 2026-04-03 到所有时敏声明
## Quality Gates Status
| Gate | Status | Notes |
|------|--------|-------|
| P6 ≥3 issues found | ✅ | 发现 7 个问题 |
| No critical claim single-sourced | ❌ | 2 个问题待修复 |
| AS_OF dates present | ❌ | 3 处缺失 |
| Counter-claims documented | ✅ | 已添加 |
```
## 集成到 SKILL.md 工作流
在 SKILL.md 的 P6 阶段,添加以下指令:
```markdown
## P6: Counter-Review (Mandatory)
**使用 Counter-Review Team 执行并行审查:**
1. **准备材料**: draft_report.md, citation_registry.md, task-notes/, p0_config.md
2. **并行分发**: 同时发送给 4 个 specialist agent
3. **等待完成**: 收集 4 份 specialist 报告
4. **协调汇总**: 发送给 coordinator 生成最终 P6 报告
5. **强制执行**: 所有 Critical 问题必须在 P7 前修复
6. **输出**: 将"核心争议"部分复制到最终报告
**Report**: `[P6 complete] {N} issues found: {critical} critical, {high} high, {medium} medium.`
```
## 团队管理
### 查看团队状态
```bash
cat ~/.claude/teams/counter-review-team/config.json
```
### 向 Agent 发送消息
```bash
SendMessage to: claim-validator
message: 开始审查任务,输入文件在 ./review-inputs/
```
### 关闭团队
```bash
SendMessage to: "*"
message: {"type": "shutdown_request", "reason": "任务完成"}
```
## 注意事项
1. **必须发现 ≥3 个问题** - 如果 coordinator 报告 <3 个问题,需要重新审查
2. **Critical 问题必须修复** - 才能进入 P7
3. **保留所有审查记录** - 作为研究方法论的一部分
4. **中文输入中文输出** - 所有 agent 支持中英文双语