$npx -y skills add PangenomeAI/academic-skills-food-nutrition --skill agri-deep-researchDeep 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 evid
| 1 | # Agri-Deep-Research — Source-Validated Reviews for Agricultural Science |
| 2 | |
| 3 | **Run the `food-deep-research` skill exactly** — its 12-subagent team |
| 4 | (`research_scope`, `research_architect`, `investigator`, `source_screener`, |
| 5 | `source_verifier`, `bibliography`, `claim_verifier`, `synthesizer`, `critic`, |
| 6 | `compiler`, `editor`, `ethics_reviewer`), both loops (evidence loop and |
| 7 | compile↔review loop), and its source discipline — with the agriculture |
| 8 | substitutions in |
| 9 | [`agri-research/references/agriculture-domain.md`](../agri-research/references/agriculture-domain.md). |
| 10 | Read that file first. No new machinery here. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | ## The substitutions |
| 13 | 1. **Persona** — a **senior agricultural scientist of the specific discipline**; |
| 14 | name it and apply its standards (domain §2). `research_architect` designs the |
| 15 | method to that discipline's conventions. |
| 16 | 2. **Evidence base** — `source_screener` ranks agriculture + multidisciplinary |
| 17 | literature: **Tier 1** = Q1/Q2 of the seven agriculture categories |
| 18 | ([`journals/_coverage_agriculture.md`](../journals/_coverage_agriculture.md)) + |
| 19 | Nature/Science/Cell/PNAS + Q1/Q2 adjacent disciplines; **Tier 2** = Q3 for gaps; |
| 20 | **Q4 avoided**. FAO/USDA/CGIAR/EFSA and extension sources are evidence with a |
| 21 | source and date (domain §3). |
| 22 | 3. **Journal routing** — `bibliography` and `compiler` format via `journal-selector` |
| 23 | using the agriculture coverage map (domain §4); APA 7.0 by default. |
| 24 | |
| 25 | ## Source discipline (inherited, non-negotiable) |
| 26 | Investigation and claim-checking operate **only on validated sources** — those that |
| 27 | passed `source_screener` (ranking) **and** `source_verifier` (existence, venue |
| 28 | legitimacy, retraction, predatory check). Every claim carries a source and locator; |
| 29 | inference is labelled as inference; `[EVIDENCE GAP]` rather than filling from memory. |
| 30 | |
| 31 | ## Agricultural rigour |
| 32 | Apply domain §5 — the `critic` should attack the usual agricultural weak points: |
| 33 | single site-year generalised to a recommendation, **pseudoreplication** (subsamples |
| 34 | treated as replicates), pot-to-field extrapolation, missing G×E, and causal language |
| 35 | unearned by the design. |
| 36 | |
| 37 | ## Inherited unchanged (not optional) |
| 38 | Four-gate citation verification (`scripts/verify_citations.py`), privacy scan, |
| 39 | `food-paper/references/human-writing.md`, and the **mandatory AI-use disclosure**. |
| 40 | Also the **full-text-access first move** — `food-deep-research`'s highlighted, one-time |
| 41 | request for the user's EndNote `.Data` folder / reference PDFs, and full-text |
| 42 | extraction via the ladder before the evidence loop |
| 43 | (`food-research/references/full-text-access.md`). |