agentleFS
WenyuChiouWenyuChiou/research-hub/skills/research-workflow-orchestrator/SKILL.md

research-workflow-orchestrator

Skill67 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run a resumable end-to-end research workflow that automates low-risk work, pauses at explicit human decision gates, records provenance, and routes each stage to the appropriate research-hub skill or MCP tool.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

15 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈10

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 5

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Do not use for one isolated operation.

    line 28
  2. Very specific:

    Read ../research-hub/references/research-protocol.md for the scope-to-query map, literature roles, version/decision observations and …

    line 35
  3. Distinctive:

    Do not infer substantive coverage from a candidate count or command exit.

    line 39
  4. Distinctive:

    If shared files are unavailable, preserve user constraints, actual source level, load-bearing evidence gaps and planned/executed …

    line 40
  5. Very specific:

    If the state file does not exist, propose a workflow ID and start at orient.

    line 51
  6. Distinctive:

    no gate: execute and validate.

    line 83
  7. Distinctive:

    Write state atomically; never record success before validation passes.

    line 87
  8. Distinctive:

    Advance: only when exit criteria in the workflow contract pass.

    line 88
  9. Distinctive:

    Do not synthesize claims from unverified metadata or treat a NotebookLM brief as ground truth.

    line 134
  10. Very specific:

    Keep pending_action specific enough to resume, but never include API keys, cookies, OAuth tokens, or secrets.

    line 148
  11. Distinctive:

    If current bytes, dependencies, or time-sensitive inputs differ from the recorded evidence, rerun only the smallest affected validation.

    line 150
  12. Distinctive:

    Never silently switch data sources, models, research questions, or inclusion criteria.

    line 159
  13. Distinctive:

    Never treat an unavailable MCP tool as permission to perform a broader browser or shell mutation.

    line 161
  14. Distinctive:

    Use the domain service through either interface.

    line 179
  15. Very specific:

    All CLI operations accept --json.

    line 186

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

research-workflow-orchestrator

Coordinate an entire research project without turning consequential scientific decisions into silent automation. The orchestrator resumes from .research/workflow_state.yml, performs safe work automatically, and asks for one structured decision only when the next action crosses a declared gate.

This is a coordination skill, not a new research engine. It routes to the existing research-hub skills and available CLI/MCP integrations. Read references/workflow-contract.md before the first run. Read references/tool-adapters.md only for the current stage or when selecting a tool adapter. The machine-readable state contract is references/workflow-state.schema.json.

Use when

  • The user asks to run, resume, automate, or supervise a multi-stage research project.
  • Work spans at least three of topic scoping, discovery, synthesis, design, experiments, writing, and release.
  • A persistent human-in-the-loop audit trail is required.

Do not use for one isolated operation. Route a single literature table to literature-triage-matrix, one design conversation to research-design-helper, one paper summary to paper-summarize, or project orientation alone to research-project-orienter.

Shared research contract

Read ../research-hub/references/research-protocol.md for the scope-to-query map, literature roles, version/decision observations and bounded completion; read ../research-hub/references/source-claim-audit.md for source support. Native research remains available when Hub runtime/actions are unavailable. Do not infer substantive coverage from a candidate count or command exit. If shared files are unavailable, preserve user constraints, actual source level, load-bearing evidence gaps and planned/executed distinctions explicitly.

Required inputs

  1. Project root.
  2. User objective and constraints.
  3. Existing .research/ manifests, if present.
  4. Available tool capabilities. Discover them; never assume an MCP server, connector, credential, or browser session exists.

If the state file does not exist, propose a workflow ID and start at orient. Creating the local state file is reversible, but present the initial plan before executing later stages.

Automation policy

Classify every proposed action before invoking a tool:

Action classDefault behavior
Read-only discovery, validation, comparisonRun automatically
Local deterministic generation with a preview or rollbackRun automatically, preserve provenance
Local reversible metadata updateRun automatically when inside approved scope
External write, public communication, account changeStop at external_write
Costly or long experiment/simulationStop at experiment_authorization
Semantic manuscript/rebuttal changeStop at semantic_revision
Submission, publication, release, merge, destructive cleanupStop at release_authorization

Unknown risk is gated. Tool availability never lowers the gate class.

Run loop

  1. Load .research/workflow_state.yml and validate the fields used by the current run. If absent, initialize from the schema; do not invent completed decisions or artifacts.
  2. Orient with research-project-orienter, or create a previewed local manifest using research-context-compressor after presenting the initial plan. This reversible project-local initialization needs no separate gate; freezing its research question or scope still needs scope_commitment.
  3. Plan the smallest next stage. Name inputs, expected artifacts, tool adapter, validation, risk class, and any gate.
  4. Decide:
    • no gate: execute and validate;
    • gate: show the decision packet and wait;
    • missing capability: use the documented fallback or report a blocker.
  5. Record stage, action, hashes/provenance, validation result, and decision. Write state atomically; never record success before validation passes.
  6. Advance only when exit criteria in the workflow contract pass. Otherwise retry within the declared bound or stop with a concrete blocker.
  7. Resume from the recorded pending action. Never rerun a costly or external action merely because a new chat/session started.

Human decision packet

At a gate, present only what the researcher needs to decide:

Gate: <gate id>
Decision: <one sentence>
Why now: <evidence and uncertainty>
Proposed action: <tool + exact mutation/cost/scope>
Preview: <diff, plan, candidates, or artifact link>
Reversible: <yes/no and rollback>
Options: accept / decline / revise / cancel
  • accept: record approval for the exact action and scope, then continue.
  • decline: record the decision, choose a safe alternative if one exists, and do not repeatedly ask for the same rejected action.
  • revise: block execution until a replacement action with a new hash is presented and accepted.
  • cancel: record cancellation and stop the workflow cleanly.

An accept is valid only through a signed policy checkpoint or exact local-TTY hash confirmation. A bare actor label from an agent or MCP caller is not human authorization.

Approval is scoped to the described action. A later public, destructive, more expensive, or semantically different action needs a new decision.

Stage routing

StagePrimary routesRequired evidence before advancing
orientresearch-project-orienter, research-context-compressorproject manifest and open questions
scopegap-to-topic, research-design-helperaccepted question, criteria, constraints
discoverliterature-triage-matrix, research-hub search, Zoteroneed-to-query coverage and actual outcomes, deduplicated candidate set, unresolved scope/access limits
synthesizepaper-summarize, paper-memory-builder, NotebookLM verifierversion/source-level claim-evidence map, assessed/total claims, contradictions and unassessed gaps
designresearch-design-helperdesign dossier and explicit assumptions
executeproject-specific code/experiment toolsreproducible command, outputs, validation
writeacademic writing skill chainsource-linked draft and review findings
releaseverification, Git/GitHub/submission toolsrelease checklist and human authorization

Do not synthesize claims from unverified metadata or treat a NotebookLM brief as ground truth. Do not invent missing sources, results, approvals, or tool output.

State and provenance

  • Canonical state path: .research/workflow_state.yml.
  • Store artifact paths plus SHA-256, stage, and timestamp. Do not store artifact contents in state.
  • Store action IDs, exact scope, parameter/preview hashes, resource bounds, and decision summaries—not private deliberation or credentials. Execute an accepted action only when these machine-verifiable fields still match.
  • Store every attempt and validation result in actions[]; terminal completed/cancelled states have no pending action, and cancelled must include a cancel decision.
  • Keep pending_action specific enough to resume, but never include API keys, cookies, OAuth tokens, or secrets.
  • If current bytes, dependencies, or time-sensitive inputs differ from the recorded evidence, rerun only the smallest affected validation.

Failure behavior

  • Bound retries per action; default maximum is two attempts unless the plan declares a smaller limit.
  • On repeated failure, set status to blocked, preserve the last verified artifact, and report the exact recovery condition.
  • Never silently switch data sources, models, research questions, or inclusion criteria.
  • Never treat an unavailable MCP tool as permission to perform a broader browser or shell mutation.

Completion output

Return:

  1. current stage and status;
  2. completed stages and validated artifacts;
  3. human decisions and their scope;
  4. unresolved evidence gaps or blockers;
  5. exact next action, or none when complete.

The workflow is complete only when the release exit criteria pass or the user explicitly ends the project. A draft alone is not completion.

Executable runtime

Use the domain service through either interface; both paths make the same state transition:

  • CLI: research-hub workflow init|status|validate|decide|resume|migrate
  • MCP: workflow_initialize, workflow_status, workflow_validate, workflow_decide, workflow_resume, and workflow_migrate

All CLI operations accept --json. Migration is a dry run unless --apply is given; apply creates a backup and atomically replaces the state. Schema 1.0 remains readable, while decisions and resume require migration to schema 1.1.

The optional agent-collab-harness v0.4 policy/checkpoint layer is discovered at runtime. If no policy is configured, research-hub keeps its standalone behavior. If a policy is configured but the package, policy, or checkpoint is unavailable, resume fails closed. research-hub doctor --json reports the integration as available, unavailable, or misconfigured.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.