research-router-skill

Routes broad life-sciences research questions to specialized evidence-gathering skills and synthesizes answers.

5.3k|765|Updated Mar 4, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/openai/plugins --skill research-router-skill
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: research-router-skill
Source: https://github.com/openai/plugins/tree/main/plugins/life-science-research/skills/research-router-skill
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/openai/plugins --skill research-router-skill

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Broad life-sciences questions often span multiple databases and evidence types, making it hard to know which sources to query and how to combine results. This Skill acts as an orchestration layer that interprets open-ended research questions, normalizes key entities, selects the smallest useful set of downstream skills, and synthesizes a concise evidence-backed answer.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Research Task Classification: Sorts requests into lanes such as human genetics, variant interpretation, pathway biology, chemistry and pharmacology, clinical evidence, and literature discovery.
  • Entity Normalization: Resolves genes, diseases, variants, compounds, pathways, and dataset identifiers to the right lookup skills before deep retrieval.
  • Skill Selection Heuristics: Maps common question types (target-disease evidence, variant interpretation, locus-to-gene mapping, structure and mechanism) to minimal skill sets like Open Targets, ClinVar, gnomAD, ChEMBL, and Reactome.
  • Subagent Parallelization: Delegates independent evidence lanes to subagents when available, while keeping interpretation, conflict resolution, and final synthesis centralized.
  • Use Case: A user asks "what is known about the association between gene X and disease Y?" The router normalizes the gene and disease, gathers genetics, expression, and clinical evidence in parallel, and returns a structured answer with caveats and next steps.

Quick Start

Ask a broad life-sciences research question such as what is known about a gene's role in a disease and have the router plan the retrieval and synthesize the evidence.

Frequently Asked Questions about research-router-skill

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I answer a broad life-sciences research question across multiple databases?

Use the research router to classify the question into evidence lanes, normalize key entities like genes and diseases, and select the smallest set of downstream skills. It gathers evidence from sources such as Open Targets, ClinVar, and ChEMBL, then synthesizes a concise answer with caveats.

How does the router choose which biomedical skills to use?

It classifies the request into one to three lanes such as genetics, chemistry, or clinical evidence, then applies selection heuristics mapping each lane to specific skills. For example, variant interpretation routes to ClinVar, gnomAD, and Ensembl, while chemistry questions route to ChEMBL, BindingDB, and PubChem.

When should I use the research router instead of a single database skill?

Use the router when a question spans multiple evidence types, the right source is unclear, or you want a synthesized answer rather than one lookup. For narrow single-source questions where a specific skill already matches, hand off directly to that skill instead.

Can the research router run evidence gathering in parallel with subagents?

Yes, when subagents are available and the work decomposes into independent lanes such as genetics, structure, and clinical evidence. Each subagent gets a bounded read-only objective and returns findings, caveats, and sources, while the coordinating agent handles synthesis and conflict resolution.

What are the limitations of automated multi-source research synthesis?

The router states cohort, ancestry, assay, tissue, and study-design limitations and does not overstate causality from association-only evidence. It distinguishes supporting, suggestive, and missing or contradictory evidence, but final interpretation still requires domain judgment.