Add reddit-research skill

[lignertys]

Pull Request Checklist

• I have read and followed the CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines.
• I have read and followed the Guidance for submissions involving paid services.
• My contribution adds a new instruction, prompt, agent, skill, workflow, or canvas extension file in the correct directory.
• The file follows the required naming convention.
• The content is clearly structured and follows the example format.
• I have tested my instructions, prompt, agent, skill, workflow, or canvas extension with GitHub Copilot.
• I have run npm start and verified that README.md is up to date.
• I am targeting the main branch for this pull request.

---

Description

reddit-research - runs market research, user research and product validation against Reddit by meaning rather than keywords: pain point discovery, competitor mentions, niche validation, subreddit discovery and trend tracking over a date range.

The practical problem it solves is that Reddit's own search is lexical, so "users complaining about X" only surfaces posts that literally contain those words. This skill queries a vector/semantic index instead, and documents the query patterns, result shapes and pagination limits so an agent can go from a research question to a sourced answer without hand-tuning search strings.

---

Type of Contribution

• New instruction file.
• New prompt file.
• New agent file.
• New plugin.
• New skill file.
• New agentic workflow.
• New canvas extension.
• Update to existing instruction, prompt, agent, plugin, skill, workflow, or canvas extension.
• Other (please specify):

---

Additional Notes

Paid service and affiliation disclosure, per #968: the skill calls reddapi.dev, which requires a REDDAPI_API_KEY and has paid usage tiers, and I operate that service. Stating the trade-off plainly so reviewers can weigh it: the skill is only useful to someone who holds a key for that API, in the same way the existing vendor-backed skills in this repo are useful to holders of those accounts. It is written as an operational reference, not a pitch - no pricing, no upsell, no comparison against alternatives - and it handles the key by environment variable only, with explicit instructions never to inline or echo it. Happy to adjust the framing or withdraw the PR if you would rather keep this category out.

On the testing checkbox: validated with npm run skill:validate and npm run build in this repo, but not exercised inside GitHub Copilot itself, so I left that box unchecked rather than check it untruthfully.

[github-actions]

🔒 PR Risk Scan Results

Scanned 1 changed file(s).

Severity	Count
🔴 High	0
🟠 Medium	0
ℹ️ Info	0

✅ No matching risk patterns were detected in changed files.

This is an automated soft-gate report. Findings indicate review targets and do not block merge by themselves.

[github-actions]

🔍 Vally Lint Results

✅ All checks passed

Scope	Checked
Skills	1
Agents	0
Total	1

Severity	Count
❌ Errors	0
⚠️ Warnings	0
ℹ️ Advisories	0

Summary

Level	Finding
ℹ️	✅ reddit-research (2/2 checks passed)
ℹ️	✓ [spec-compliance] All 1 skill(s) are spec-compliant.
ℹ️	✓ spec-compliance: All spec checks passed.
ℹ️	✓ [valid-refs] All file references across 1 skill(s) are valid.
ℹ️	✓ valid-refs: All file references resolve to existing files within the skill directory.
ℹ️	1 skill(s) linted, 1 passed

Full linter output

### Linting skills/reddit-research
✅ reddit-research (2/2 checks passed)
    ✓ [spec-compliance] All 1 skill(s) are spec-compliant.
        ✓ spec-compliance: All spec checks passed.
    ✓ [valid-refs] All file references across 1 skill(s) are valid.
        ✓ valid-refs: All file references resolve to existing files within the skill directory.

1 skill(s) linted, 1 passed

[lignertys]

Heads up on the risk scan finding above: the flagged line was inside the skill's own anti-prompt-injection guidance - it told the agent never to obey instruction-shaped text found in Reddit posts, and quoted two example phrases to make that concrete. The scanner matched the quoted examples rather than the intent.

Reworded it to describe the pattern instead of quoting it, so the guidance survives without the literal strings. Pushed as 1f8e0ab; npm run skill:validate still passes and no other file changed.