schaefera/doubleo7
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

feat: add current-date context and footnote-style citations to research loop

Browse source 
Interpolates today's date into the researcher's preamble so it can judge
source freshness instead of relying on training-cutoff knowledge, and
asks it to cite facts with bracketed footnote numbers backed by a
Sources list, which the writer agent is now instructed to preserve
through to the final report.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Austin Schaefer 2026-08-14 19:06:15 +02:00
parent 3fd18e6a7c
commit 34b93eae3d
3 changed files with 35 additions and 14 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

1
Cargo.lock generated
View file

@ -1979,6 +1979,7 @@ name = "doubleo7"
version = "0.1.0"
dependencies = [
"anyhow",
"chrono",
"reqwest 0.13.4",
"rig",
"schemars 1.2.2",

1
Cargo.toml
View file

@ -14,3 +14,4 @@ tokio = { version = "1.53.1", features = ["full"] }
toml = "1.1.4+spec-1.1.0"
tracing = "0.1"
tracing-subscriber = { version = "0.3.23", features = ["env-filter"] }
chrono = "0.4.45"

47
src/deep_research/starter.rs
View file

@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
use crate::deep_research::review::{self, Review};
use crate::deep_research::tools::{FetchPage, SearchWeb};
use rig::client::{AgentClientExt, Nothing};
use rig::completion::Prompt;
use rig::providers::ollama;
use crate::deep_research::review::{self, Review};
use crate::deep_research::tools::{FetchPage, SearchWeb};
/// The tool-calling research loop needs to reliably decide what to search
/// for, when a page is worth fetching, and when it has enough evidence —
@ -37,7 +37,9 @@ fn initialize_observability() {
pub(crate) async fn start() -> anyhow::Result<()> {
initialize_observability();
let topic = std::env::args().nth(1).unwrap_or_else(|| DEFAULT_TOPIC.to_string());
let topic = std::env::args()
.nth(1)
.unwrap_or_else(|| DEFAULT_TOPIC.to_string());
let report = research(&topic).await?;
@ -84,17 +86,25 @@ async fn gather_findings(
feedback: Option<&Review>,
round: usize,
) -> anyhow::Result<String> {
let current_date = chrono::offset::Local::now().to_string();
let researcher = client
.agent(RESEARCHER_MODEL)
.name("researcher")
.preamble(
.preamble(format!(
"You are a meticulous research assistant. Use the search_web and fetch_page tools to \
investigate the user's topic: run several searches with varied phrasing, fetch the \
most promising pages, and cross-check claims across at least two sources before \
trusting them. Once you are confident you have enough evidence, stop calling tools \
and reply with a plain-text dump of every fact you gathered, the source URL it came \
from, and any open questions or contradictions between sources. This is raw research \
material for a writer, not a final report, so favor completeness over polish.",
trusting them. Ensure sources are up to date: the current date is {current_date}. \
Once you are confident you have enough evidence, stop calling tools and reply with a \
plain-text dump of every fact you gathered, using footnote-style citations: write each \
fact followed by a bracketed number like [1], then at the end of your reply list a \
'Sources' section mapping each number to the exact URL it came from, one per line, e.g. \
'[1] https://example.com/page'. Reuse the same number when multiple facts come from the \
same URL — do not give one URL two different numbers. Also call out any open questions \
or contradictions between sources, citing the footnotes involved. This is raw research \
material for a writer, not a final report, so favor completeness over polish.")
.as_str(),
)
.tool(SearchWeb)
.tool(FetchPage)
@ -107,7 +117,8 @@ async fn gather_findings(
You already ran a research pass on this topic. A reviewer checked it against its \
cited sources and found it insufficient. Do more research to address the reviewer's \
feedback, then produce an updated findings dump: carry forward what's solid, and \
add, correct, or better-source whatever the gaps call for.\n\n\
add, correct, or better-source whatever the gaps call for. Gaps include out-of-date,\
irrelevant, or clearly wrong information. The date is {current_date}.\n\n\
Solid findings from the last pass — keep and build on these:\n{}\n\n\
Gaps the reviewer found — conclusions not actually backed by their source, sources \
that don't line up with the conclusion drawn from them, or parts of the topic still \
@ -129,15 +140,23 @@ async fn gather_findings(
}
#[tracing::instrument(skip(client, findings), fields(gen_ai.agent.name = "writer"))]
async fn write_report(client: &ollama::Client, topic: &str, findings: &str) -> anyhow::Result<String> {
async fn write_report(
client: &ollama::Client,
topic: &str,
findings: &str,
) -> anyhow::Result<String> {
let writer = client
.agent(WRITER_MODEL)
.name("writer")
.preamble(
"You turn raw research notes into a clear, well-organized report for the reader. \
Structure the report with headings, cite source URLs inline next to the claims they \
support, and call out any open questions or contradictions the research turned up. Do \
not invent facts beyond what the notes provide.",
"You turn raw research notes into a clear, well-organized report for the reader. The \
notes use footnote-style citations — a bracketed number like [1] after a fact, with a \
Sources section mapping numbers to URLs. Preserve this scheme in your report: keep the \
same [n] markers next to the claims they support (renumbering only if you drop unused \
sources), and end the report with a 'Sources' section listing every footnote number \
still in use next to its exact URL. Structure the body with headings, and call out any \
open questions or contradictions the research turned up. Do not invent facts beyond \
what the notes provide.",
)
.build();