Multi-Source Research Synthesis
Dump research from multiple sources into one place, then have Claude find patterns, contradictions, and gaps across all of them.
You have research scattered across 30 PDFs, 15 browser tabs, a few podcasts you half-remember, and sticky notes from a conference. Each source tells part of the story but you can't see the full picture — patterns, contradictions, and gaps are invisible when sources live in silos.
Who it's for: researchers synthesizing findings across disparate sources, analysts combining reports from multiple data providers, journalists cross-referencing multiple sources for investigative pieces, consultants building recommendations from multi-stakeholder inputs, students writing papers that require triangulating evidence
Example
"Synthesize these 25 sources on remote work trends" → Cross-source synthesis revealing 4 consensus findings, 3 direct contradictions between studies, 2 gaps no source addresses, and a narrative synthesis with source-level citations for each claim
New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.
# Multi-Source Research Synthesis
## Role
You help me synthesize research across multiple sources. You maintain a structured source database, analyze for patterns and contradictions, and produce balanced summaries that identify where I need to dig deeper.
## Directory Structure
- `sources.md` — Master source table: name, key argument, evidence quality, quotes
- `synthesis.md` — Cross-source analysis: agreements, disagreements, gaps
- `summary.md` — Balanced summary of current knowledge
- `raw/` — Raw source material and notes
## Source Assessment Criteria
- Evidence quality (1-5): methodology rigor, sample size, replicability
- Argument strength (1-5): logic, support, counterargument handling
- Relevance (1-5): direct connection to research question
- Recency: how current the information is
## Rules
1. Assess every source on the criteria above — no exceptions
2. Note direct quotes with page/section references
3. Identify when sources contradict each other explicitly
4. The synthesis must address gaps, not just findings
5. Summaries should note confidence levels for each claim
## Commands
- "/add [source]" — Add a new source to sources.md with assessment
- "/analyze" — Cross-analyze all sources for patterns, contradictions, gaps
- "/summarize" — Write balanced summary with confidence levels
- "/gaps" — Identify what's missing and suggest where to look
- "/status" — Show how many sources added and coverage assessmentWhat This Does
Replaces the chaos of 14 browser tabs and scattered highlights. Consolidate sources into a structured file, then Claude identifies agreements, contradictions, credibility gaps, and areas needing more research.
Inspired by Marco Kotrotsos's 20 Non-Coding Uses for Claude's Code Mode.
Prerequisites
- Claude Code installed
- Multiple sources on a research topic (articles, papers, notes)
- A specific research question or topic
Step-by-Step Setup
- Create your research folder
- Save the CLAUDE.md template
- Add your first source with
/add - Continue adding sources one at a time
- Run
/analyzeonce you have 3+ sources
Example Usage
"I'm researching the impact of remote work on productivity. Create the sources file"
"Here's source 1: [paste article]. Add it with your assessment"
"Analyze all sources — where do they agree and disagree?"
"Which sources are most credible and why?"
"Write a balanced 800-word summary noting where I should dig deeper"
Tips
- Quality of source assessment matters more than quantity of sources
- Add sources one at a time for thorough assessment
- Run the gap analysis before concluding research — it often reveals blind spots
- Include sources you disagree with for balance