food-research

Solid

Run a comprehensive, multi-source literature and evidence-synthesis workflow for food & nutrition science. Use when the user wants to research a food/nutrition topic in depth, do a literature review, build an evidence brief, screen and synthesize many sources, verify citations, or scope a systematic review. Coordinates food-science databases, preprints, semantic search, and food-safety/regulatory sources; runs a four-layer search, two-phase screening, and cross-source synthesis via subagents; grades evidence and maps gaps. Triggers: research this topic, deep literature review, comprehensive review, evidence synthesis, systematic review, scope a review, find all the literature, what does the evidence say, food science research, nutrition evidence, survey the field.

AI & Automation 19 stars 2 forks Updated 4 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 84/100

Stars 20%
43
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Food-Research — Comprehensive Evidence Synthesis for Food & Nutrition Science Build a broad, defensible understanding of a topic by searching many sources, screening them consistently, and synthesizing across them. Original work; no third-party research text is reused. Architecture informed by open community literature-search skills (see Acknowledgements in the repo README). ## Streams — pick one and when to use it Four streams share the same search/screening machinery but differ in depth. Three of them (**quick brief, full review, deep research**) prioritize sources by **journal ranking** via `journal_ranker`; the **systematic** stream does not (inclusion is by pre-specified eligibility, not prestige). | Stream | Use it when… | Depth | Journal-ranking filter | |---|---|---|---| | **quick brief** | You need fast orientation on a topic — "what's known about X", a starting point, a scoping glance. | One search pass; top sources; key open questions. May run inline without subagents. | Yes — Tier 1 only, usually | | **full review** | You want a thorough narrative review manuscript (the default). | Four-layer search + two-phase screening + synthesis → **write manuscript** (`writer`) → **review loop** (`reviewer`) → **Word (.docx)**. | Yes — Tier 1 preferred, Tier 2 to fill gaps | | **deep research** | The question extends beyond the literature — regulatory landscape, market/technology state, an open-ended "investigate this" — or you want an iterative, verified deep dive on a...

Details

Author
PangenomeAI
Repository
PangenomeAI/academic-skills-food-nutrition
Created
2 weeks ago
Last Updated
4 days ago
Language
Python
License
MIT

Integrates with

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

Code & Development Solid

food-deep-research

General-purpose deep research that produces a fully written, source-validated literature review on any question: scope it, design the method, discover and screen sources by journal ranking, validate every source, extract and verify evidence, synthesize, stress-test, then write and format the review (APA 7.0 by default, or a target journal's style) and polish it through an editorial + integrity review loop. Use standalone for a deep dive or literature review, or as the deep-dive engine called by food-research. Runs a 12-subagent team with iterate-to-saturation and compile↔review loops. Triggers: deep research, research this in depth, write a literature review, investigate thoroughly, comprehensive review, state of the evidence, briefing on, dig into, deep dive.

19 Updated 4 days ago
PangenomeAI
AI & Automation Solid

agri-research

Run a comprehensive, multi-source literature and evidence-synthesis workflow for agricultural science, as a senior agricultural scientist of the relevant discipline (agronomy, soil science, horticulture, dairy and animal science, agricultural engineering, or agricultural economics). Same machinery as food-research, but the evidence base is agriculture and multidisciplinary literature ranked by journal quartile: Q1/Q2 agriculture journals plus the Nature, Science, Cell and PNAS families first, Q3 only for gaps, Q4 avoided. Use to research an agricultural topic in depth, do a literature review, build an evidence brief, or scope a systematic review. Triggers: research this agricultural topic, agronomy literature review, soil science evidence synthesis, horticulture review, animal science evidence, crop research, farming systems review, what does the agricultural evidence say.

19 Updated 4 days ago
PangenomeAI
AI & Automation Solid

agri-deep-research

Deep research producing a fully written, source-validated literature review on an agricultural question, as a senior agricultural scientist of the relevant discipline: scope, design the method, discover and screen by journal ranking, validate every source, extract and verify evidence, synthesize, stress-test, then write and format the review through an editorial and integrity loop. Same 12-subagent machinery as food-deep-research, grounded in agriculture and multidisciplinary literature (Q1/Q2 preferred, Q4 avoided). Use standalone for an agricultural deep dive, or as the engine called by agri-research. Triggers: deep research agriculture, investigate this agronomy question, agricultural literature review, state of the evidence in soil science, deep dive crop research.

19 Updated 4 days ago
PangenomeAI