Back to Prompt Library
planning
Define Review Workflow and Tasks
Inspect the original prompt language first, then copy or adapt it once you know how it fits your workflow.
Linked challenge: Orchestrate Scientific Integrity Agent Crew
Format
Code-aware
Lines
49
Sections
10
Linked challenge
Orchestrate Scientific Integrity Agent Crew
Prompt source
Original prompt text with formatting preserved for inspection.
49 lines
10 sections
No variables
1 code block
Define a set of `Task` objects that guide the agents through the scientific review process. Create tasks for summarizing the input abstract (using a Mistral Saba based agent if possible), verifying facts, checking consistency, and detecting AI slop. Finally, define the `Crew` with these agents and tasks, specifying the `Process.sequential` flow. The output of the crew should be a comprehensive review report.
```python
# ... (agents defined previously)
# Summarizer Agent (using Mistral Saba for efficiency)
# mistral_saba_llm = ChatMistralAI(model="mistral-large-latest", temperature=0.1, mistral_api_key="YOUR_MISTRAL_API_KEY")
# summarizer_agent = Agent(role='Summarizer', goal='Condense complex texts into concise summaries.', llm=mistral_saba_llm, ...)
# Define Tasks
summarize_task = Task(
description="Summarize the provided scientific abstract into 3-4 key bullet points.",
agent=None, # Assign summarizer_agent here
expected_output="A bulleted list summarizing the abstract.",
output_file="summary.md"
)
verify_facts_task = Task(
description="Verify all factual claims in the abstract using the Pinecone Fact Checker tool. Identify and justify any inaccuracies.",
agent=factual_verifier,
expected_output="A list of factual claims with their verification status and justifications.",
output_file="factual_verification.md"
)
check_consistency_task = Task(
description="Analyze the abstract for logical consistency, internal contradictions, and methodological soundness. Highlight any areas needing clarification or revision.",
agent=consistency_checker,
expected_output="A report detailing inconsistencies found and suggestions for improvement.",
output_file="consistency_check.md"
)
detect_ai_slop_task = Task(
description="Examine the writing style for signs of generic, vague, or repetitive language typical of AI-generated content. Provide specific examples and a likelihood score.",
agent=ai_slop_detector,
expected_output="A report on potential 'AI slop' indicators with examples and an AI generation likelihood score.",
output_file="ai_slop_detection.md"
)
# Final Review Task (assigned to a lead agent or the consistency_checker for synthesis)
final_review_task = Task(
description="Synthesize findings from all agents into a final comprehensive review report, including an overall verdict and actionable recommendations.",
agent=consistency_checker, # Could be a new 'Review Synthesizer' agent
expected_output="A comprehensive review report combining all findings, with an overall verdict on scientific integrity and actionable recommendations.",
context=[summarize_task, verify_facts_task, check_consistency_task, detect_ai_slop_task]
)
# Form the Crew
scientific_review_crew = Crew(
agents=[factual_verifier, consistency_checker, ai_slop_detector], # Add summarizer_agent if created
tasks=[summarize_task, verify_facts_task, check_consistency_task, detect_ai_slop_task, final_review_task],
process=Process.sequential, # Or hierarchical for more complex flows
verbose=2 # Enables detailed logging
)
# To run the crew:
# result = scientific_review_crew.kickoff(inputs={'abstract': 'Your scientific abstract text here.'})
# print(result)
```Adaptation plan
Keep the source stable, then change the prompt in a predictable order so the next run is easier to evaluate.
Keep stable
Preserve the role framing, objective, and reporting structure so comparison runs stay coherent.
Tune next
Swap in your own domain constraints, anomaly thresholds, and examples before you branch variants.
Verify after
Check whether the prompt asks for the right evidence, confidence signal, and escalation path.