Add mandatory lightweight research step to video-reference-analyst

The reference analyst skill went straight from capability audit to
creative proposals with no research. This caused the agent to propose
concepts based solely on the reference analysis and its own knowledge,
missing content landscape context, technique best practices, and
subject-matter depth.

Added Step 3b between critical questions and creative proposals:
- Content landscape scan (3-5 similar existing videos)
- Style/technique research (AI model strengths, prompting patterns)
- Subject-matter research (facts, tropes, hooks)
- 2-3 minute time budget — lightweight, not full research-director

skills/meta/video-reference-analyst.md

@@ -140,6 +140,41 @@ Before proposing, gather what the VideoAnalysisBrief doesn't tell you:
 Do NOT ask all at once. Lead with the most important gap. If the user's initial
 message already answers some of these, skip those.
 
+### Step 3b: Lightweight Research
+
+**This step is mandatory.** Even with a clear reference video and user direction,
+the agent must do targeted research before proposing concepts. Do NOT skip this
+and rely solely on the reference analysis + your own knowledge.
+
+Research scope (keep it focused — this is not the full research-director stage):
+
+1. **Content landscape:** Search for 3-5 existing videos similar to what the user
+   wants. What works? What's been overdone? What angles are fresh? This grounds
+   your proposals in what's actually out there, not just what you imagine.
+
+2. **Style/technique research:** Search for best practices relevant to the
+   production approach:
+   - If AI video gen: which models handle this subject best? Known prompting
+     patterns? Character consistency techniques?
+   - If animation: what animation styles suit this content?
+   - If the reference has a distinctive technique: how is it achieved?
+
+3. **Subject-matter research:** If the user's topic has factual content (science,
+   history, how-things-work), gather 3-5 specific data points or facts that could
+   make the video more interesting. Even for entertainment/comedy videos, research
+   what makes similar content engaging (tropes, hooks, payoff patterns).
+
+**How to present:** Don't dump raw research. Weave findings into your proposals:
+- "I looked at similar channels — most food personification videos use X, so our
+  twist of Y would stand out"
+- "Kling handles anthropomorphic characters well when you use [specific technique]"
+- "The top-performing 60-second comedy shorts all use a 3-beat structure: setup,
+  escalation, unexpected payoff"
+
+**Time budget:** 2-3 minutes of web search. This is a lightweight pass, not a
+deep investigation. The full research-director stage runs later inside the
+pipeline if needed.
+
 ### Step 4: Creative Proposals (2-3 variants)
 
 MANDATORY: The agent must NEVER propose a carbon copy. The reference is inspiration,