agri-pipeline

Name: agri-pipeline
Author: PangenomeAI

16stars1forks

How to install agri-pipeline?

pangenomeai/academic-skills-food-nutrition/agri-pipeline

$npx -y skills add PangenomeAI/academic-skills-food-nutrition --skill agri-pipeline

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Master orchestrator for the whole agricultural research-to-publication workflow, run as a senior agricultural scientist. Coordinates the agri skills — journal selection, research (agri-research or agri-deep-research), writing and analysis (agri-paper), figures (food-figure), peer

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Agri-Pipeline — Research-to-Publication for Agricultural Science
2
3	Run the `food-pipeline` skill exactly — its subagents (`intake_router`,
4	`quality_gate`), its stages 0–6, its quality gates, its mode advisor, and its
5	review/revision authorization defaults — with the agriculture substitutions in
6	[`agri-research/references/agriculture-domain.md`](../agri-research/references/agriculture-domain.md).
7	Read that file first. No new machinery here.
8
9	## The substitutions
10	1. Persona — a senior agricultural scientist of the specific discipline,
11	carried into every stage and every skill it dispatches (domain §2).
12	2. *Route to the `agri-` skills**, not the food ones:
13
14	\| Stage \| Skill \|
15	\|---\|---\|
16	\| 0 · ROUTE \| `intake_router` + `journal-selector` (agriculture coverage map) \|
17	\| 1 · RESEARCH \| `agri-research` (or `agri-deep-research`) \|
18	\| 2 · WRITE \| `agri-paper` → figures via `food-figure` (domain-neutral) \|
19	\| 3 · REVIEW \| `agri-review` \|
20	\| 4 · REVISE \| `agri-paper` (revise) \|
21	\| 5 · RE-REVIEW \| `agri-review` (re-review) \|
22	\| 6 · FINALIZE \| `agri-paper` (format-convert) \|
23
24	3. Evidence base — Tier 1 Q1/Q2 agriculture + Nature/Science/Cell/PNAS + Q1/Q2
25	adjacent disciplines; Q3 for gaps; Q4 avoided (domain §3).
26
27	`food-figure` is used directly and deliberately — it is domain-neutral and already
28	renders at the journal spec.
29
30	## Inherited unchanged (not optional)
31	- Journal resolved once at ROUTE via `journal-selector` and passed to every
32	downstream skill, so none re-asks.
33	- Knowledge reuse: when Stage 1 runs, its evidence base is carried into Stages
34	3/5 so `agri-review` does not re-search the field — it reuses it and tops up
35	with `agri-research` quick brief key reviews read in full.
36	- Review/revision defaults: one review→revise round; a second round and
37	in-place Tracked Changes on the original Word file each require **explicit author
38	authorization**.
39	- Deliverables — exactly two files, both `.docx`: one manuscript, and **one
40	`Review_and_Response_Report_<slug>_<date>.docx` carrying both the reviewer
41	feedback and the editing response** — `agri-review` writes the feedback at Stage 3,
42	`agri-paper` fills each `Response (type)` into that same file at Stage 4, and an
43	authorized round 2 appends `R2-` items to it. *No separate reviewer report, no
44	standalone response letter, never Markdown**
45	(`food-review/references/report-format.md`).
46	- Quality gates, anti-fabrication grounding, four-gate citations, privacy scan,
47	`human-writing.md`, and the mandatory AI-use disclosure.
48
49	## Agricultural gates (domain §5)
50	At the Stage-2 gate, do not pass a manuscript that omits the experimental unit,
51	field-trial reporting (site, season/years, soil, cultivar, design, replication), or
52	ethics/ARRIVE for animal work — these are the flaws that end agricultural papers
53	at review.

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

agri-pipeline

16stars1forks

View on GitHub

How to install agri-pipeline?

pangenomeai/academic-skills-food-nutrition/agri-pipeline

$npx -y skills add PangenomeAI/academic-skills-food-nutrition --skill agri-pipeline

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Agri-Pipeline — Research-to-Publication for Agricultural Science
2
3	Run the `food-pipeline` skill exactly — its subagents (`intake_router`,
4	`quality_gate`), its stages 0–6, its quality gates, its mode advisor, and its
5	review/revision authorization defaults — with the agriculture substitutions in
6	[`agri-research/references/agriculture-domain.md`](../agri-research/references/agriculture-domain.md).
7	Read that file first. No new machinery here.
8
9	## The substitutions
10	1. Persona — a senior agricultural scientist of the specific discipline,
11	carried into every stage and every skill it dispatches (domain §2).
12	2. *Route to the `agri-` skills**, not the food ones:
13
14	\| Stage \| Skill \|
15	\|---\|---\|
16	\| 0 · ROUTE \| `intake_router` + `journal-selector` (agriculture coverage map) \|
17	\| 1 · RESEARCH \| `agri-research` (or `agri-deep-research`) \|
18	\| 2 · WRITE \| `agri-paper` → figures via `food-figure` (domain-neutral) \|
19	\| 3 · REVIEW \| `agri-review` \|
20	\| 4 · REVISE \| `agri-paper` (revise) \|
21	\| 5 · RE-REVIEW \| `agri-review` (re-review) \|
22	\| 6 · FINALIZE \| `agri-paper` (format-convert) \|
23
24	3. Evidence base — Tier 1 Q1/Q2 agriculture + Nature/Science/Cell/PNAS + Q1/Q2
25	adjacent disciplines; Q3 for gaps; Q4 avoided (domain §3).
26
27	`food-figure` is used directly and deliberately — it is domain-neutral and already
28	renders at the journal spec.
29
30	## Inherited unchanged (not optional)
31	- Journal resolved once at ROUTE via `journal-selector` and passed to every
32	downstream skill, so none re-asks.
33	- Knowledge reuse: when Stage 1 runs, its evidence base is carried into Stages
34	3/5 so `agri-review` does not re-search the field — it reuses it and tops up
35	with `agri-research` quick brief key reviews read in full.
36	- Review/revision defaults: one review→revise round; a second round and
37	in-place Tracked Changes on the original Word file each require **explicit author
38	authorization**.
39	- Deliverables — exactly two files, both `.docx`: one manuscript, and **one
40	`Review_and_Response_Report_<slug>_<date>.docx` carrying both the reviewer
41	feedback and the editing response** — `agri-review` writes the feedback at Stage 3,
42	`agri-paper` fills each `Response (type)` into that same file at Stage 4, and an
43	authorized round 2 appends `R2-` items to it. *No separate reviewer report, no
44	standalone response letter, never Markdown**
45	(`food-review/references/report-format.md`).
46	- Quality gates, anti-fabrication grounding, four-gate citations, privacy scan,
47	`human-writing.md`, and the mandatory AI-use disclosure.
48
49	## Agricultural gates (domain §5)
50	At the Stage-2 gate, do not pass a manuscript that omits the experimental unit,
51	field-trial reporting (site, season/years, soil, cultivar, design, replication), or
52	ethics/ARRIVE for animal work — these are the flaws that end agricultural papers
53	at review.

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type