Scientific Problem Selection
Copyright (c) 2026 KunAgent. Licensed under the MIT License.
Purpose
Evaluate and prioritize research questions by importance, novelty, tractability, evidence, resources, ethics, and falsifiability.
Tool routing
| Tool or skill |
Use |
web_fetch |
Retrieve public papers, datasets, calls, or standards. |
browser_use |
Inspect public literature and research portals. |
render_chart |
Compare candidate problems using structured criteria. |
load_skill |
Load the scholarly-research skill for a dedicated literature review. |
Workflow
- Define field, decision horizon, available methods, resources, and constraints.
- Express each candidate as a falsifiable question with a measurable outcome.
- Map current evidence, competing explanations, and decisive experiments.
- Score importance, novelty, tractability, risk, ethics, and learning value.
- Choose a portfolio with a lead problem and fallback path.
Completion gates
- Verify novelty claims against current literature.
- Identify required sample size, data access, and ethical approvals.
- State what result would change the research direction.
Boundaries
- Do not equate fashionable topics with important questions.
- Do not recommend work that lacks a plausible ethical and resource path.
Delivery
Lead with the outcome, name the evidence used for verification, and disclose any real limitation that remains.
1---2name: scientific-problem-selection3description: Evaluate and prioritize research questions by importance, novelty, tractability, evidence, resources, ethics, and falsifiability.4---56# Scientific Problem Selection7Copyright (c) 2026 KunAgent. Licensed under the MIT License.89## Purpose10Evaluate and prioritize research questions by importance, novelty, tractability, evidence, resources, ethics, and falsifiability.1112## Tool routing13| Tool or skill | Use |14|---|---|15| `web_fetch` | Retrieve public papers, datasets, calls, or standards. |16| `browser_use` | Inspect public literature and research portals. |17| `render_chart` | Compare candidate problems using structured criteria. |18| `load_skill` | Load the scholarly-research skill for a dedicated literature review. |1920## Workflow211. Define field, decision horizon, available methods, resources, and constraints.222. Express each candidate as a falsifiable question with a measurable outcome.233. Map current evidence, competing explanations, and decisive experiments.244. Score importance, novelty, tractability, risk, ethics, and learning value.255. Choose a portfolio with a lead problem and fallback path.2627## Completion gates28- Verify novelty claims against current literature.29- Identify required sample size, data access, and ethical approvals.30- State what result would change the research direction.3132## Boundaries33- Do not equate fashionable topics with important questions.34- Do not recommend work that lacks a plausible ethical and resource path.3536## Delivery37Lead with the outcome, name the evidence used for verification, and disclose any real limitation that remains.
KunAgent