# Evaluate Technical Options with Structured Spikes

Technical decisions often need evidence, not opinion. This skill guides timeboxed spikes with options, proof of concept results, comparison matrices, risks, and recommendations.

## Install

```bash
npx skillstore add joseph obrien/89jobrien-technical-research
```

## Metadata

- Status: approved
- Slug: 89jobrien-technical-research
- Version: 1.0.1
- Author version: 1.0.1
- Skillstore revision: r1
- Version status: valid
- Tree hash: 917621e284e8eb2c9a36d6378fd156ad74adb4bb89258a73fe4248e3512816a2
- Author: Joseph OBrien
- GitHub username: 89jobrien
- License: MIT
- Repository: https://github.com/89jobrien/steve/tree/main/steve/skills/technical-research
- Ref: c4037264bbd363c572662d6154a3ab28f5ca4f53
- Supported tools: Claude, Codex, Claude Code
- Audit status: complete
- Agent install advisory: allowed
- Manual install advisory: allowed
- Artifact signature: available
- Audit attestation: unavailable
- Human verification: not\_verified
- Risk factors: external\_commands
- Quality score: 79
- Quality tier: bronze
- Public page: https://skillstore.pages.dev/skills/89jobrien-technical-research
- Manifest: https://skillstore.pages.dev/api/skills/89jobrien-technical-research/manifest

## Capabilities

- Guides timeboxed investigations with objectives, questions, and success criteria.
- Structures option comparisons with proof of concept findings, pros, cons, and effort estimates.
- Builds weighted decision matrices for multiple technical approaches.
- Documents risks, dependencies, implementation phases, and open questions.
- Produces recommendation records that answer the original research questions.

## Use Cases

- Select a Framework: Compare candidate frameworks against delivery risk, maintainability, performance, and team familiarity.
- Validate Feasibility: Plan a short proof of concept that answers clear technical questions before implementation starts.
- Prepare an Architecture Decision: Turn research notes into a recommendation with risks, dependencies, and phased implementation steps.

## Prompt Templates

### Start a Spike

```
Create a technical spike for choosing between [Option A] and [Option B]. Include objective, questions, success criteria, risks, and a recommendation.
```

### Compare Options

```
Compare three approaches for [problem]. Use weighted criteria for performance, maintainability, cost, delivery risk, and team familiarity.
```

### Plan Evidence Collection

```
Run a timeboxed research plan for [decision]. Define experiments, proof of concept scope, expected evidence, and reporting format.
```

### Challenge a Recommendation

```
Audit our existing findings for [technology decision]. Challenge assumptions, identify missing evidence, update the comparison matrix, and propose an implementation path.
```

## Limitations

- Does not replace expert security, legal, or compliance review for high-risk decisions.
- Requires user-provided context, constraints, and access to relevant code or documentation.
- Proof of concept quality depends on available time and test coverage.
- Does not verify external benchmarks or vendor claims without source review.

## Best Practices

- Define success criteria before comparing options.
- Keep proof of concept work limited to the agreed timebox.
- Record unresolved questions and owners before implementation starts.

## Anti Patterns

- Choosing the preferred tool before evidence is collected.
- Running a spike without constraints, scoring criteria, or decision owners.
- Treating prototype code as production-ready without review.

## Security Audit

- Audited at: 2026-07-05T13:57:55.028\+00:00
- Summary: The only static finding is a false positive caused by Markdown inline code for a reference file path in SKILL.md. No evidence found for prompt injection, data exfiltration, unsafe external command execution, or malicious intent in the reviewed files.

## Stats

- Views: 167
- Downloads: 20
- Favorites: 0
- Popularity score: 0