parallel-deep-research▌
parallel-web/parallel-agent-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Exhaustive research with configurable depth, latency, and cost trade-offs for complex topics.
- ›Three processor tiers (pro-fast, ultra-fast, ultra) ranging from 30 seconds to 25 minutes, with cost scaling from 1x to 3x baseline
- ›Asynchronous execution with polling: kick off research instantly, monitor progress via URL, retrieve results when ready without blocking
- ›Outputs formatted markdown report and JSON metadata; executive summary printed to stdout for quick overview
- ›Designed for e
Deep Research
Research topic: $ARGUMENTS
When to use (vs parallel-web-search)
ONLY use this skill when the user explicitly requests deep/exhaustive research. Deep research is 10-100x slower and more expensive than parallel-web-search. For normal "research X" requests, quick lookups, or fact-checking, use parallel-web-search instead.
Step 1: Start the research
parallel-cli research run "$ARGUMENTS" --processor pro-fast --no-wait --json
If this is a follow-up to a previous research or enrichment task where you know the interaction_id, add context chaining:
parallel-cli research run "$ARGUMENTS" --processor lite --no-wait --json --previous-interaction-id "$INTERACTION_ID"
By chaining interaction_id values across requests, each follow-up question automatically has the full context of prior turns — so you can drill deeper into a topic without restating what was already researched. Use --processor lite for follow-ups since the heavy research was already done in the initial turn and the follow-up just needs to build on that context.
This returns instantly. Do NOT omit --no-wait — without it the command blocks for minutes and will time out.
Processor options (choose based on user request):
| Processor | Expected latency | Use when |
|---|---|---|
pro-fast |
30s – 5 min | Default — good balance of depth and speed |
ultra-fast |
1 – 10 min | Deeper analysis, more sources (~2x cost) |
ultra |
5 – 25 min | Maximum depth, only when explicitly requested (~3x cost) |
Parse the JSON output to extract the run_id, interaction_id, and monitoring URL. Immediately tell the user:
- Deep research has been kicked off
- The expected latency for the processor tier chosen (from the table above)
- The monitoring URL where they can track progress
Tell them they can background the polling step to continue working while it runs.
Step 2: Poll for results
Choose a descriptive filename based on the topic (e.g., ai-chip-market-2026, react-vs-vue-comparison). Use lowercase with hyphens, no spaces.
parallel-cli research poll "$RUN_ID" -o "$FILENAME" --timeout 540
Important:
- Use
--timeout 540(9 minutes) to stay within tool execution limits - Do NOT pass
--json— the full output is large and will flood context. The-oflag writes results to files instead. - The
-oflag generates two output files:$FILENAME.json— metadata and basis$FILENAME.md— formatted markdown report
- The poll command prints an executive summary to stdout when the research completes. Share this executive summary with the user — it gives them a quick overview without having to open the files.
If the poll times out
Higher processor tiers can take longer than 9 minutes. If the poll exits without completing:
- Tell the user the research is still running server-side
- Re-run the same
parallel-cli research pollcommand to continue waiting
Response format
After step 1: Share the monitoring URL (for tracking progress only — it is not the final report).
After step 2:
- Share the executive summary that the poll command printed to stdout
- Tell the user the two generated file paths:
$FILENAME.md— formatted markdown report$FILENAME.json— metadata and basis
- Share the
interaction_idand tell the user they can ask follow-up questions that build on this research (e.g., "drill deeper into X" or "compare that to Y")
Do NOT re-share the monitoring URL after completion — the results are in the files, not at that link.
Ask the user if they would like to read through the files for more detail. Do NOT read the file contents into context unless the user asks.
Remember the interaction_id — if the user asks a follow-up question that relates to this research, use it as --previous-interaction-id in the next research or enrichment command.
Setup
If parallel-cli is not found, install and authenticate:
curl -fsSL https://parallel.ai/install.sh | bash
If unable to install that way, install via pipx instead:
pipx install "parallel-web-tools[cli]"
pipx ensurepath
Then authenticate:
parallel-cli login
Or set an API key: export PARALLEL_API_KEY="your-key"
How to use parallel-deep-research 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 parallel-deep-research
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches parallel-deep-research from GitHub repository parallel-web/parallel-agent-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 parallel-deep-research. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /parallel-deep-research) 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
4.7★★★★★48 reviews- ★★★★★Ganesh Mohane· Dec 28, 2024
parallel-deep-research fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Dev Sanchez· Dec 24, 2024
parallel-deep-research fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Ava Mensah· Dec 16, 2024
We added parallel-deep-research from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Michael Park· Dec 16, 2024
parallel-deep-research reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Benjamin Jackson· Dec 8, 2024
parallel-deep-research has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Nov 19, 2024
Registry listing for parallel-deep-research matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Sakura Agarwal· Nov 15, 2024
Registry listing for parallel-deep-research matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Benjamin Kim· Nov 7, 2024
parallel-deep-research reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Aditi Khanna· Nov 7, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: parallel-deep-research is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Aanya Perez· Nov 7, 2024
We added parallel-deep-research from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
showing 1-10 of 48