research-proposal▌
luwill/research-skills · updated May 22, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Generate high-quality academic research proposals for PhD applications following Nature Reviews-style academic writing conventions.
Research Proposal Generator
Generate high-quality academic research proposals for PhD applications following Nature Reviews-style academic writing conventions.
Overview
This skill guides the generation of research proposals through a structured 5-phase workflow:
- Requirements Gathering - Collect research topic, domain, language preferences
- Literature Collection - Gather relevant literature from multiple sources
- Outline Generation - Create structured outline for user approval
- Content Writing - Generate full proposal based on approved outline
- Output & Review - Deliver Markdown file with quality checklist
Target Output: 2,000-4,000 words (default ~3,000 words) for PhD applications.
Phase 1: Requirements Gathering
Use AskUserQuestion to collect the following information:
Required Information
-
Research Topic/Direction
- What is the core research question or area?
- Any specific problems to address?
-
Academic Domain
- STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)
- Humanities (History, Philosophy, Literature, Languages)
- Social Sciences (Sociology, Psychology, Economics, Political Science)
-
Output Language
- English
- 中文 (Chinese)
-
Target Word Count
- Default: 3,000 words
- Range: 2,000-4,000 words (humanities may extend to 10,000)
Optional Information
-
Target Institution(s)
- University/research group names
- Specific faculty members of interest
-
Existing Materials
- User's prior research or publications
- Relevant literature already collected in Zotero
Example Questions
Questions to ask the user:
1. "What is your research topic or direction? Please describe the core question or problem you want to investigate."
2. "Which academic domain does your research belong to?"
- STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)
- Humanities (History, Philosophy, Literature)
- Social Sciences (Sociology, Psychology, Economics)
3. "What language should the proposal be written in?"
- English
- 中文 (Chinese)
4. "Do you have a target word count? (Default: ~3,000 words)"
5. "Are you applying to specific institutions or working with particular faculty?"
6. "Have you uploaded relevant literature to your Zotero library that I should reference?"
Phase 2: Literature Collection
Literature Sources Strategy
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Literature Sources │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ General Info → WebSearch (trends, news, reviews) │
│ Open Access → arXiv, PubMed (preprints, OA papers)│
│ Closed Access → Zotero MCP (user's uploaded papers) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Using WebSearch
Search for:
- Recent review articles and meta-analyses
- Research trends and emerging topics
- News about breakthroughs in the field
- Methodological advances
Example searches:
"{topic} systematic review 2024 2025"
"{topic} research trends future directions"
"{topic} methodology recent advances"
Using Zotero MCP
IMPORTANT: Remind users to upload relevant closed-access literature to Zotero before starting.
Search User's Library
# Search by topic keywords
Use: mcp__zotero__zotero_search_items
Parameters: query = "{research topic keywords}"
# Advanced search with filters
Use: mcp__zotero__zotero_advanced_search
Parameters: conditions based on author, title, year, tags
# Semantic search for related papers
Use: mcp__zotero__zotero_semantic_search
Parameters: query = "{research question}"
Retrieve Paper Content
# Get full text content
Use: mcp__zotero__zotero_get_item_fulltext
Parameters: item_key = "{item key from search}"
# Get user's annotations and highlights
Use: mcp__zotero__zotero_get_annotations
Parameters: item_key = "{item key}"
# Get user's notes
Use: mcp__zotero__zotero_get_notes
Parameters: item_key = "{item key}"
Literature Organization
Organize collected literature into categories:
- Background/Context - Foundational papers establishing the field
- Current State - Recent advances and state-of-the-art
- Research Gap - Papers identifying limitations or open questions
- Methodology - Papers with relevant methods to adopt/adapt
- Related Work - Adjacent research areas for comparison
Phase 3: Outline Generation
Proposal Structure by Domain
Read the reference file for domain-specific guidance:
references/STRUCTURE_GUIDE.md- Detailed section guidelinesreferences/DOMAIN_TEMPLATES.md- STEM vs Humanities differences
Standard Outline Template
# [Research Title]
## Abstract (150-300 words, 5-10%)
- Research problem summary
- Research questions/objectives
- Methodology overview
- Expected significance
## 1. Introduction (500-800 words, 15-20%)
### 1.1 Background and Context
### 1.2 Problem Statement
### 1.3 Research Questions/Objectives
### 1.4 Scope and Delimitations
## 2. Literature Review (500-1000 words, 20-25%)
### 2.1 Theoretical Framework
### 2.2 Current State of Research
### 2.3 Research Gap Analysis
### 2.4 Positioning of This Study
## 3. Methodology (500-800 words, 20-25%)
### 3.1 Research Design
### 3.2 Data Collection Methods
### 3.3 Data Analysis Approach
### 3.4 Validity and Limitations
## 4. Timeline (200-300 words, 5-10%)
### 4.1 Research Phases
### 4.2 Key Milestones
### 4.3 Gantt Chart (optional)
## 5. Significance and Expected Contributions (200-400 words, 10-15%)
### 5.1 Theoretical Contributions
### 5.2 Practical Implications
### 5.3 Broader Impact
## References (minimum 40 references)
Note: Do NOT include Appendix sections. All essential content should be integrated into the main body.
User Confirmation
CRITICAL: Present the outline to the user and wait for confirmation before proceeding to content generation.
Present the generated outline and ask:
"Here is the proposed outline for your research proposal:
[Display outline with section titles and estimated word counts]
Please review and let me know:
1. Is the overall structure acceptable?
2. Would you like to add, remove, or modify any sections?
3. Should any section receive more/less emphasis?
I will proceed with content generation once you approve the outline."
Phase 4: Content Writing
Writing Style Guidelines
Read and apply: references/WRITING_STYLE_GUIDE.md
Key Principles
-
Academic Register
- Formal tone, avoid colloquialisms
- Third person preferred, limited first person plural ("we")
- Precise terminology
-
Prose-Based Writing Style (CRITICAL)
AVOID point-by-point enumeration. Academic proposals should read as flowing, connected prose rather than bulleted lists or numbered items. Use transitional phrases and coherent paragraphs to present ideas.
Avoid Use Instead Bullet points listing objectives Integrated paragraph describing objectives with transitions Numbered lists of contributions Narrative prose explaining contributions in context Tables for methodology steps Flowing description of research design When lists ARE appropriate (use sparingly):
- Research questions/objectives (as a focused set of 2-4 items)
- Timeline milestones (where tabular format aids clarity)
- Technical specifications that require precise enumeration
Example transformation:
❌ Poor (point-by-point):
The contributions include: - Novel segmentation algorithm - Multi-modal fusion framework - Clinical validation study✓ Good (prose-based):
This research is expected to advance the field through several interconnected contributions. First, the development of a novel segmentation algorithm will enable automated plaque detection with accuracy surpassing current methods. Building on this foundation, a multi-modal fusion framework will integrate complementary imaging data to capture plaque characteristics inaccessible to any single modality. Finally, rigorous clinical validation will establish the prognostic value of these computational biomarkers for predicting cardiovascular events. -
Hedging Language (Academic Caution)
Avoid Use Instead "will prove" "aims to demonstrate" "definitely" "likely", "potentially" "is obvious" "evidence suggests" "proves" "indicates", "demonstrates" -
Sentence Templates
Introducing Background:
- "Over the past decade, [X] has emerged as a critical area of..."
- "Recent advances in [X] have opened new possibilities for..."
Identifying Gaps:
- "However, [X] remains poorly understood."
- "Despite these advances, significant challenges persist in..."
- "A critical gap exists in our understanding of..."
Stating Objectives:
- "This research aims to address [X] by..."
- "The primary objective of this study is to..."
- "This proposal seeks to investigate..."
Methodology Justification:
- "Building on previous work, this study proposes to..."
- "This approach was selected because..."
- "[Method] offers several advantages for studying [X]..."
Expected Contributions:
- "This work has the potential to advance..."
- "The findings may contribute to..."
- "This research could provide insights into..."
-
Transitions and Connectors
- Addition: Moreover, Furthermore, In addition, Additionally
- Contrast: However, Nevertheless, Conversely, On the other hand
- Causation: Therefore, Consequently, As a result, Thus
- Emphasis: Importantly, Notably, Of particular significance
- Sequence: First, Subsequently, Finally, Following this
-
Paragraph Structure
Topic Sentence → Supporting Evidence (with citations) → Synthesis/Implications- 4-8 sentences per paragraph
- Clear logical progression
- Explicit transitions between paragraphs
Citation Formatting
Based on domain:
- STEM: APA style (Author, Year)
- Humanities: MLA or Chicago style
- Social Sciences: APA or Chicago style
First mention of abbreviations: "coronary CT angiography (CCTA)"
Integrate citations into text: "Recent studies (Smith et al., 2023; Jones, 2024) have demonstrated..."
Figure Suggestions
IMPORTANT: Include suggestions for figures at appropriate locations throughout the proposal. Figures significantly enhance readability and demonstrate the applicant's ability to communicate complex ideas visually.
Figure Placement Guidelines
Insert figure suggestions using the following format:
> **[Figure 1 Suggestion]** *Title: Overview of the proposed research framework*
> Content: A flowchart or schematic diagram illustrating the three-phase research
> design, showing data flow from imaging modalities through AI processing to
> clinical outcomes. Include icons for CCTA/IVUS/OCT inputs, deep learning
> modules, and output predictions.
> Recommended style: Clean vector graphics with consistent color scheme.
Recommended Figure Types by Section
| Section | Suggested Figure Type |
|---|---|
| Introduction | Conceptual diagram showing research scope and positioning |
| Literature Review | Timeline of key developments; Taxonomy/classification of existing methods |
| Methodology | Research framework flowchart; Network architecture diagram; Data processing pipeline |
| Timeline | Gantt chart showing research phases and milestones |
| Significance | Impact diagram showing theoretical and practical contributions |
Figure Suggestion Principles
- Strategic placement: Suggest 3-5 figures for a 3,000-word proposal
- Self-explanatory: Each figure should convey key information without requiring extensive caption reading
- Consistent style: Recommend unified visual language (colors, fonts, icons)
- Professional quality: Suggest tools (e.g., Adobe Illustrator, draw.io, BioRender for biomedical)
- Accessibility: Recommend colorblind-friendly palettes and sufficient contrast
Language-Specific Considerations
English Output
- Follow standard academic English conventions
- Use British or American English consistently
- Maintain formal register throughout
Chinese Output (中文)
- 使用规范学术中文
- 适当使用 hedging 语言:
- "本研究旨在探讨..." (not "本研究将证明...")
- "研究结果可能表明..." (not "研究结果必定显示...")
- "有望推进..." (not "肯定会推进...")
- 保持正式学术语体
- 参考文献格式遵循 GB/T 7714
Phase 5: Output and Review
File Generation
Generate the proposal as a Markdown file:
proposal_{topic_slug}_{YYYY-MM-DD}.md
Save to user's working directory or specified location.
Quality Checklist
Read and apply: references/QUALITY_CHECKLIST.md
Verify:
Structure
- All required sections present
- Word counts within specified ranges
- Logical flow between sections
- Clear section headings
Content
- Research questions clearly stated
- Literature review identifies specific gap
- Methodology appropriate for research questions
- Timeline realistic and detailed
- Significance clearly articulated
Academic Style
- Formal academic tone throughout
- Appropriate hedging language used
- Smooth transitions between sections <
How to use research-proposal on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add research-proposal
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches research-proposal from GitHub repository luwill/research-skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate research-proposal. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /research-proposal) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.8★★★★★33 reviews- ★★★★★Alexander Flores· Dec 4, 2024
research-proposal is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Xiao Farah· Nov 23, 2024
research-proposal reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Hana Liu· Nov 7, 2024
research-proposal has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Amina Rahman· Oct 26, 2024
Keeps context tight: research-proposal is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Charlotte Ramirez· Oct 14, 2024
I recommend research-proposal for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Sep 25, 2024
Keeps context tight: research-proposal is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Aanya Sethi· Sep 17, 2024
We added research-proposal from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Oshnikdeep· Sep 1, 2024
research-proposal reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Amina Zhang· Sep 1, 2024
research-proposal is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Ganesh Mohane· Aug 20, 2024
I recommend research-proposal for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 33