Generated banner for Scientific Problem Selection
Generated logo for Scientific Problem Selection

Scientific Problem Selection

AnthropicOfficialPublished by Anthropic

  • Skill
  • Guidelines
  • Science and research
  • Apache-2.0
  • No issues found

From the author

This skill should be used when scientists need help with research problem selection, project ideation, troubleshooting stuck projects, or strategic scientific decisions. Use this skill when users ask to pitch a new research idea, work through a project problem, evaluate project risks, plan research strategy, navigate decision trees, or get help choosing what scientific problem to work on. Typical requests include "I have an idea for a project", "I'm stuck on my research", "help me evaluate this project", "what should I work on", or "I need strategic advice about my research".
— the description by Anthropic

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

Scientific Problem Selection provides a structured, conversational approach to navigating the research lifecycle. Based on the principles of problem choice over execution quality, this skill helps researchers move from initial ideation to strategic planning. It guides users through nine specific modules—including intuition pumps, risk assessment, and decision tree navigation—to ensure that time is invested in high-impact, feasible problems. By treating research as a series of testable assumptions and strategic decision points, the framework helps scientists avoid common pitfalls, manage adversity, and optimize their research strategy.

What it does

  • Facilitates project ideation using structured intuition pumps.
  • Performs rigorous risk assessment and assumption analysis.
  • Defines success metrics through optimization functions.
  • Navigates complex decision trees for project troubleshooting.
  • Provides strategies for adversity response and problem inversion.
  • Synthesizes research plans into coherent communication packages.

When to use it

  • When choosing a new thesis, postdoc, or lab research direction.
  • When a project is stuck and requires a strategic pivot.
  • When evaluating the feasibility and impact of a new research idea.
  • When planning long-term research strategy or navigating career transitions.
  • When preparing for committee meetings or grant applications.

Advantages

  • Increases research impact by prioritizing problem selection over incremental execution.
  • Reduces time wasted on dead-end projects through early risk identification.
  • Provides a repeatable, evidence-based framework for scientific decision-making.
  • Helps transform crises into opportunities for project growth.
  • Encourages objective evaluation of biological and technical assumptions.

Usage examples

“I have an idea for a new project involving CRISPR, but I am not sure if it is worth pursuing.”
The agent initiates the ideation workflow, asking for a summary and guiding the user through intuition pumps to refine the idea and assess its potential impact.
“My current experiment is failing and I am stuck. Can you help me troubleshoot?”
The agent shifts to the troubleshooting workflow, helping the user identify the core problem, analyze assumptions, and navigate the decision tree to find a path forward.
“I need to evaluate the risks of my proposed research strategy.”
The agent leads the user through a systematic risk assessment, helping to list assumptions, score them by risk level and time-to-test, and identify potential red flags.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/anthropics/scientific-problem-selection/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip scientific-problem-selection.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Anthropic

Scientific Problem Selection Skills

A conversational framework for systematic scientific problem selection based on Fischbach & Walsh's "Problem choice and decision trees in science and engineering" (Cell, 2024).

Getting Started

Present users with three entry points:

1) Pitch an idea for a new project — to work it up together

2) Share a problem in a current project — to troubleshoot together

3) Ask a strategic question — to navigate the decision tree together

This conversational entry meets scientists where they are and establishes a collaborative tone.


Option 1: Pitch an Idea

Initial Prompt

Ask: "Tell me the short version of your idea (1-2 sentences)."

Response Approach

After the user shares their idea, return a quick summary (no more than one paragraph) demonstrating understanding. Note the general area of research and rephrase the idea in a way that highlights its kernel—showing alignment and readiness to dive into details.

Follow-up Prompt

Then ask for more detail: "Now give me a bit more detail. You might include, however briefly or even say where you are unsure:

  1. What exactly you want to do

  2. How you currently plan to do it

  3. If it works, why will it be a big deal

  4. What you think are the major risks"

Workflow

From there, guide the user through the early stages of problem selection and evaluation:

  • Skill 1: Intuition Pumps - Refine and strengthen the idea

  • Skill 2: Risk Assessment - Identify and manage project risks

  • Skill 3: Optimization Function - Define success metrics

  • Skill 4: Parameter Strategy - Determine what to fix vs. keep flexible

See references/01-intuition-pumps.md, references/02-risk-assessment.md, references/03-optimization-function.md, and references/04-parameter-strategy.md for detailed guidance.


Option 2: Troubleshoot a Problem

Initial Prompt

Ask: "Tell me a short version of your problem (1-2 sentences or whatever is easy)."

Response Approach

After the user shares their problem, return a quick summary (no more than one paragraph) demonstrating understanding. Note the context of the project where the problem occurred and rephrase the problem—highlighting its core essence—so the user knows the situation is understood. Also raise additional questions that seem important to discuss.

Follow-up Prompt

Then ask: "Now give me a bit more detail. You might include, however briefly:

  1. The overall goal of your project (if we have not talked about it before)

  2. What exactly went wrong

  3. Your current ideas for fixing it"

Workflow

From there, guide the user through troubleshooting and decision tree navigation:

  • Skill 5: Decision Tree Navigation - Plan decision points and navigate between execution and strategic thinking

  • Skill 4: Parameter Strategy - Fix one parameter at a time, let others float

  • Skill 6: Adversity Response - Frame problems as opportunities for growth

  • Skill 7: Problem Inversion - Strategies for navigating around obstacles

Always include workarounds that might be useful whether or not the problem can be fixed easily.

See references/05-decision-tree.md, references/06-adversity-planning.md, references/07-problem-inversion.md, and references/04-parameter-strategy.md for detailed guidance.


Option 3: Ask a Strategic Question

Initial Prompt

Ask: "Tell me the short version of your question (1-2 sentences)."

Response Approach

After the user shares their question, return a quick summary (no more than one paragraph) demonstrating understanding. Note the broader context and rephrase the question—highlighting its crux—to confirm alignment with their thinking.

Follow-up Prompt

Then ask: "Now give me a bit more detail. You might include, however briefly:

  1. The setting (i.e., is this about a current or future project)

  2. A bit more detail about what you're thinking"

Workflow

From there, draw on the specific modules from the problem choice framework most appropriate to the question:

  • Skills 1-4 for future project planning (ideation, risk, optimization, parameters)

  • Skills 5-7 for current project navigation (decision trees, adversity, inversion)

  • Skill 8 for communication and synthesis

  • Skill 9 for comprehensive workflow orchestration

See the complete reference materials in the references/ folder.


Core Framework Concepts

The Central Insight

Problem Choice >> Execution Quality

Even brilliant execution of a mediocre problem yields incremental impact. Good execution of an important problem yields substantial impact.

The Time Paradox

Scientists typically spend:

  • Days choosing a problem

  • Years solving it

This imbalance limits impact. These skills help invest more time choosing wisely.

Evaluation Axes

For Evaluating Ideas:

  • X-axis: Likelihood of success

  • Y-axis: Impact if successful

Skills help move ideas rightward (more feasible) and upward (more impactful).

The Risk Paradox
  • Don't avoid risk—befriend it

  • No risk = incremental work

  • But: Multiple miracles = avoid or refine

  • Balance: Understood, quantified, manageable risk

The Parameter Paradox
  • Too many fixed = brittleness

  • Too few fixed = paralysis

  • Sweet spot: Fix ONE meaningful constraint

The Adversity Principle
  • Crises are inevitable (don't be surprised)

  • Crises are opportune (don't waste them)

  • Strategy: Fix problem AND upgrade project simultaneously


The 9 Skills Overview

SkillPurposeOutputTime
1. Intuition PumpsGenerate high-quality research ideasProblem Ideation Document~1 week
2. Risk AssessmentIdentify and manage project risksRisk Assessment Matrix3-5 days
3. Optimization FunctionDefine success metricsImpact Assessment Document2-3 days
4. Parameter StrategyDecide what to fix vs. keep flexibleParameter Strategy Document2-3 days
5. Decision Tree NavigationPlan decision points and altitude danceDecision Tree Map2 days
6. Adversity ResponsePrepare for crises as opportunitiesAdversity Playbook2 days
7. Problem InversionNavigate around obstaclesProblem Inversion Analysis1 day
8. Integration & SynthesisSynthesize into coherent planProject Communication Package3-5 days
9. Meta-FrameworkOrchestrate complete workflowComplete Project Package1-6 weeks

Skill Workflow

SKILL 1: Intuition Pumps
         | (generates idea)
         v
SKILL 2: Risk Assessment
         | (evaluates feasibility)
         v
SKILL 3: Optimization Function
         | (defines success metrics)
         v
SKILL 4: Parameter Strategy
         | (determines flexibility)
         v
SKILL 5: Decision Tree
         | (plans execution and evaluation)
         v
SKILL 6: Adversity Planning
         | (prepares for failure modes)
         v
SKILL 7: Problem Inversion
         | (provides pivot strategies)
         v
SKILL 8: Integration & Communication
         | (synthesizes into coherent plan)
         v
SKILL 9: Meta-Skill
         (orchestrates complete workflow)

Key Design Principles

  1. Conversational Entry - Meet users where they are with three clear starting points

  2. Thoughtful Interaction - Ask clarifying questions; low confidence prompts additional input

  3. Literature Integration - Use PubMed searches at strategic points for validation

  4. Concrete Outputs - Every skill produces tangible 1-2 page documents

  5. Building Specificity - Progressive detail emerges through targeted questions

  6. Flexibility - Skills work independently, sequentially, or iteratively

  7. Scientific Rigor - Claims about generality and feasibility should be evidence-based


Who Should Use These Skills

Graduate Students (Primary Audience)
  • When: Choosing thesis projects, qualifying exams, committee meetings

  • Focus: Skills 1-3 (ideation, risk, impact) + Skill 9 (complete workflow)

  • Timeline: 2-4 weeks for comprehensive planning

Postdocs
  • When: Starting new position, planning independent projects, fellowship applications

  • Focus: All skills, emphasizing independence and risk management

  • Timeline: 1-2 weeks intensive planning

Principal Investigators
  • When: New lab, new direction, mentoring trainees, grant cycles

  • Focus: Skills 1, 3, 4, 6 (ideation, impact, parameters, adversity)

  • Timeline: Ongoing, integrate into lab culture

Startup Founders
  • When: Company inception, pivot decisions, investor pitches

  • Focus: Skills 1-4 (ideation through parameters) + Skill 8 (communication)

  • Timeline: 1-2 weeks for initial planning, revisit quarterly


Reference Materials

Detailed skill documentation is available in the references/ folder:

FileContentSearch Patterns
01-intuition-pumps.mdGenerate research ideasIntuition Pump #, Trap #, Phase [0-9]
02-risk-assessment.mdRisk identificationRisk.*1-5, go/no-go, assumption
03-optimization-function.mdSuccess metricsGenerality.*Learning, optimization, impact
04-parameter-strategy.mdParameter fixationfixed.*float, constraint, parameter
05-decision-tree.mdDecision tree navigationaltitude, Level [0-9], decision
06-adversity-planning.mdAdversity responseadversity, crisis, ensemble
07-problem-inversion.mdProblem inversion strategiesStrategy [0-9], inversion, goal
08-integration-synthesis.mdIntegration and synthesisnarrative, communication, story
09-meta-framework.mdComplete workflowPhase, workflow, orchestrat

Expected Outcomes

Immediate (After Completing Workflow)
  • Clear project vision

  • Honest risk assessment

  • Contingency plans

  • Communication materials ready

  • Confidence in problem choice

6-Month
  • Faster decisions (have framework)

  • Productive adversity handling

  • No existential crises (risks mitigated)

2-Year
  • Published results or strong progress

  • Avoided dead-end projects

  • Career aligned with goals

  • Time well-spent (ultimate measure)


Foundational Reference

Fischbach, M.A., & Walsh, C.T. (2024). "Problem choice and decision trees in science and engineering." Cell, 187, 1828-1833.

Based on course BIOE 395 taught at Stanford University.

Files

references/04-parameter-strategy.md

SKILL 4: Parameter Fixation Strategy

Overview

This skill helps scientists strategically decide which parameters to fix and which to keep flexible in their project. The paradox: too many fixed parameters creates brittleness, but too few causes paralysis. The key is fixing ONE parameter thoughtfully and letting others float—constraints engender creativity.

Core Principle

"Fix one parameter; let the others float."

Most failure modes in ideation involve fixing too many parameters at the outset (system + method + application). Conversely, statements like "I want to do impactful work in cell engineering" are so broad they cause paralysis. The sweet spot: fix one meaningful constraint and let creativity flow within that boundary.

What Are Project Parameters?

Parameters are the choices that define your project:

Common Parameters:

  • System: Which organism/cell type/tissue/molecule?

  • Question: What biological phenomenon to study?

  • Tool/Method: Which experimental approach?

  • Application: What practical use or goal?

  • Output: What form will results take?

  • Collaborators: Who will you work with?

  • Timeline: How fast must you move?

  • Resources: What's available/necessary?

The Skill Workflow

Phase 1: Parameter Inventory (10 minutes)

First, let's identify what's already fixed in your current project idea:

Question 1: List your project parameters

For each category, indicate if it's FIXED (must stay) or FLOATING (could change):

Parameter TypeYour ChoiceStatus (F/FL)Why Fixed?
System[organism/cell/tissue]F / FL[reason]
Question[biological phenomenon]F / FL[reason]
Tool/Method[techniques]F / FL[reason]
Application[use case/goal]F / FL[reason]
Timeline[duration]F / FL[reason]
Resources[equipment/funding]F / FL[reason]

Question 2: Count your fixed parameters

  • How many did you mark as FIXED? _____

  • If >2, you may have over-constrained the problem

Question 3: Why are they fixed? For each fixed parameter, is it because: A. Your expertise/passion B. Lab resources/capabilities
C. Advisor requirements D. You think it's the "best" solution E. Historical accident (you started this way)

Phase 2: The GLP-1 Example (Case Study)

Let's learn from a concrete example:

Proposed Project: Engineer a T cell to produce GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) for continuous supply.

Analysis: What's Fixed?

  1. Improving GLP-1 receptor agonist delivery characteristics (the problem)

  2. Using an engineered T cell (the solution)

Problem: Two parameters fixed = poor technique-application match

Alternative Framings:

If you fix Parameter 1 (GLP-1 delivery):

  • Let the solution float

  • Better options: peptide engineering for extended half-life, oral peptides, small molecules, B cells (better protein secretion)

  • Why T cell is suboptimal: Not designed for protein secretion

  • Best for: Trainee in metabolism lab who cares about GLP-1

If you fix Parameter 2 (Engineered T cell):

  • Let the application float

  • Better options: local-acting peptides (cytokines, chemokines, growth factors) for oncology/autoimmunity/regeneration

  • Why GLP-1 is suboptimal: Doesn't leverage T cell's natural capabilities

  • Best for: Trainee in immunology/cell engineering lab

Key Insight: Which parameter you fix depends on YOUR interests and your lab's expertise. Both can lead to great projects, but they're DIFFERENT projects.

Phase 3: Diagnostic Questions

The Goldilocks Test:

Too Many Fixed Parameters (>2):

  • Are you forcing a technique-application match?

  • If one assumption fails, does everything fail?

  • Are you more attached to HOW than WHAT?

  • Does your project sound like: "Use X to do Y in Z"?

Too Few Fixed Parameters (0-1 very broad):

  • Do you feel paralyzed where to start?

  • Is your statement super generic? ("Do impactful work in...")

  • Are you avoiding commitment?

  • Do you have decision fatigue?

Just Right (1-2 well-chosen):

  • Do you have creative constraints?

  • Can you articulate why THIS constraint matters?

  • If one approach fails, do alternatives exist?

  • Does the constraint energize you?

Phase 4: The Illumina Example (Constraints Drive Innovation)

Historical Context: Next-generation sequencing wasn't designed; we got Illumina's approach (many short reads).

Initial Constraint: Short reads seemed like a limitation

  • Not what we would have "asked for"

  • Seemed inferior to long reads

Innovation Unleashed:

  • Computational methods (assembly algorithms)

  • Novel applications (RNA-seq, ChIP-seq, ATAC-seq)

  • Unexpected uses (protein folding via sequencing)

  • Biochemical creativity to work within constraints

Lesson: Constraints don't limit creativity—they focus it. If you feel stuck, fix ONE parameter and watch resourcefulness emerge.

Phase 5: Which Parameter Should You Fix?

Strategic Questions to Identify the Right Fixed Parameter:

  1. What can you prototype quickly?

    • What test article could you build rapidly?

    • Which experimental conditions enable early go/no-go?

    • What gives you fastest feedback?

  2. What are people around you unusually good at?

    • Lab expertise?

    • Core facility capabilities?

    • Collaborator strengths?

    • Your unique skill combination?

  3. What do you enjoy so much you don't think of it as work?

    • System you're passionate about?

    • Technique you love?

    • Type of question that excites you?

  4. What's your competitive advantage?

    • Unique resource access?

    • Rare skill combination?

    • Proprietary data/reagents?

    • First-mover opportunity?

Common Strategic Choices:

Fix the System (Let question & tool float):

  • Good if: You're an expert in the organism/tissue/cell type

  • Enables: Asking multiple questions, trying various tools

  • Example: "I study Drosophila neural development; I'll let the specific questions and methods emerge"

Fix the Question (Let system & tool float):

  • Good if: You care deeply about a biological phenomenon

  • Enables: Testing across systems, using best tool for each

  • Example: "I want to understand phase separation; I'll study it wherever it's clearest"

Fix the Tool (Let system & question float):

  • Good if: You're developing or mastering a technology

  • Enables: Finding best applications, comparing across systems

  • Example: "I'm building a new microscopy method; I'll find the most impactful uses"

Fix the Application (Let system & tool float):

  • Good if: You have a specific translational goal

  • Enables: Trying multiple approaches, testing in different models

  • Example: "I want to treat disease X; I'm open to any validated approach"

Phase 6: Parameter Flexibility Matrix

For your project, let's create a flexibility assessment:

ParameterCurrentlyShould Be?If Problem Arises, Could This Float?
System[F/FL][F/FL]Yes / No / Maybe
Question[F/FL][F/FL]Yes / No / Maybe
Tool[F/FL][F/FL]Yes / No / Maybe
Application[F/FL][F/FL]Yes / No / Maybe
Timeline[F/FL][F/FL]Yes / No / Maybe
Resources[F/FL][F/FL]Yes / No / Maybe

Analysis:

  • Flexibility Score: How many "Yes" or "Maybe"? _____

  • Risk Assessment: If <3 can float, you're brittle

  • Pivot Potential: Which parameters provide escape routes?

Phase 7: Scenario Planning

For each fixed parameter, let's plan what happens if it becomes untenable:

Fixed Parameter 1: [Name it]

  • Why it's fixed: [Your reason]

  • Risk if this fails: [What breaks]

  • Contingency: [What could you float instead]

  • Alternative project: [If you fixed something else]

Fixed Parameter 2: [Name it]

  • Why it's fixed: [Your reason]

  • Risk if this fails: [What breaks]

  • Contingency: [What could you float instead]

  • Alternative project: [If you fixed something else]

Phase 8: The Unfixing Exercise

Sometimes you need to unfix parameters to escape a rut:

Current State: [Describe your over-constrained project]

Unfixing Experiment:

Try 1: Unfix the System

  • Keep question & tool

  • What other systems could you study?

  • Which would be easier/faster/more informative?

Try 2: Unfix the Tool

  • Keep system & question

  • What other methods exist?

  • Which are more mature/accessible/powerful?

Try 3: Unfix the Question

  • Keep system & tool

  • What other questions could you ask?

  • Which would be more impactful/feasible?

Evaluation: Does any "unfixed" version seem better than your original? If yes, you over-constrained.

Phase 9: Literature Reality Check

Let's use PubMed to see how others handled parameter fixation:

Search 1: Successful projects in your area

  • What did they fix?

  • What did they let float?

  • Did they pivot from their initial parameter choices?

Search 2: Failed or stalled projects

  • (Often in discussion sections or preprints)

  • Did they over-constrain?

  • What parameters trapped them?

Search 3: Method papers

  • How did technology developers choose applications?

  • Did they fix the tool and let applications emerge?

Your Searches: What specific papers should we analyze for parameter lessons?

Output Deliverable

2-Page Parameter Strategy Document

Page 1: Current State and Analysis
Parameter Inventory:
ParameterCurrent StatusStrategic RationaleFlexibility
SystemFixed: [X][Why]Can float if: [condition]
QuestionFloating: [Y,Z][Why]Constrained by: [X]
Tool[Status][Why][Contingency]
Application[Status][Why][Contingency]
Diagnostic Summary:
  • Fixed Parameters: [Count and list]

  • Assessment: ☐ Too Many (>2) / ☐ Just Right (1-2) / ☐ Too Few (0, too broad)

  • Primary Fixed Parameter: [The one that matters most]

  • Reason for Fixation: [Expertise/Passion/Resources/Other]

Goldilocks Test Results:
  • Over-constrained indicators: [Yes/No to each test]

  • Under-constrained indicators: [Yes/No to each test]

  • Verdict: [Analysis]

Page 2: Strategy and Contingencies

Core Fixed Parameter: [The one to keep]

  • Rationale: [Why this one]

  • Your advantage: [Expertise/access/passion]

  • Enables: [What becomes possible]

Parameters That Should Float: [List]

  • [Parameter 1]: [How to explore alternatives]

  • [Parameter 2]: [How to explore alternatives]

If Core Assumptions Fail:

Scenario 1: [Specific failure mode]

  • Unfix: [Which parameter to let float]

  • Alternative 1: [New configuration]

  • Alternative 2: [Another option]

Scenario 2: [Another failure mode]

  • Unfix: [Which parameter]

  • Alternative 1: [New configuration]

  • Alternative 2: [Another option]

Project Ensemble:
Core Fixed: [X]

Possible Projects:
1. [X] + [A] + [B1] → [Outcome]
2. [X] + [A] + [B2] → [Outcome]
3. [X] + [C] + [B1] → [Outcome]

All share [X], but float other parameters
Strategic Questions Answered:
  1. Quick prototype: [How to test quickly]

  2. Team strengths: [Who's good at what]

  3. Your passion: [What energizes you]

  4. Competitive advantage: [Your edge]

Historical Parallel:

[Example like Illumina where constraints drove innovation in your field]

  • The constraint: [What seemed limiting]

  • The innovation: [How people worked within it]

  • Your application: [How this applies to your project]

Practical Examples

Example 1: GLP-1 T Cell Project (Over-Constrained)
  • Fixed: GLP-1 delivery + T cell engineering

  • Problem: Poor technique-application match

  • Solution: Unfix one parameter

    • Fix delivery, float cell type → Better options emerge

    • Fix T cell, float payload → Better applications emerge

Example 2: Drosophila Neurobiologist (Well-Constrained)
  • Fixed: Drosophila nervous system

  • Floating: Specific questions, methods

  • Works because: Deep system expertise, many tools available

  • Enables: Pursuing most impactful questions as field evolves

Example 3: "Impactful Cell Engineering" (Under-Constrained)
  • Fixed: Nothing specific

  • Problem: Paralysis from too many options

  • Solution: Fix one meaningful constraint

    • Option A: Fix CAR-T platform → Find best applications

    • Option B: Fix autoimmune disease → Find best cell engineering approach

    • Option C: Fix specific rare disease → Let methods emerge

Key Principles to Remember

  1. Constraints Engender Creativity: Limitations focus resourcefulness

  2. One Parameter Rule: Fix one meaningful constraint, let others float

  3. Match to Your Strengths: Fix the parameter you have advantage in

  4. Technique-Application Match: Don't force tools into wrong problems

  5. Flexibility = Resilience: Floating parameters provide pivot options

  6. Historical Lesson: Best technologies emerged from working within constraints (Illumina)

  7. Not Forever: Parameters can unfix mid-project when stuck

Warning Signs

Over-Constrained (Too Many Fixed):

  • Project sounds like: "Use X to study Y in Z"

  • When one assumption fails, everything fails

  • You're attached to HOW more than WHAT

  • Forcing a technique-application match

Under-Constrained (Too Few/Vague):

  • Statement is incredibly broad ("impactful work in...")

  • Feeling paralyzed about where to start

  • Avoiding commitment due to infinite options

  • No clear next experimental step

Well-Constrained:

  • One clear fixed parameter with good rationale

  • Multiple paths within that constraint

  • Energized by the focused challenge

  • If one approach fails, alternatives exist

Ready to Begin?

Let's start with Phase 1. Please provide:

  1. Your current project description

  2. List of what you think is fixed vs. floating

  3. Your lab's core expertise

  4. What aspect excites you most

Together we'll optimize your parameter strategy for maximum creativity and resilience.


Remember: The right constraint is liberating, not limiting. It channels creativity into productive directions while maintaining flexibility for pivots.

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: Claude Code, Claude apps

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Published by
Anthropic
Publisher
Anthropic (Official)
Source
anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins · bio-research/skills/scientific-problem-selection · commit e050c2e
Licence
Apache License 2.0 (redistribution allowed)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced
Also distributed in
anthropics/life-sciences

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Anthropic or Anthropic.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download scientific-problem-selection.zip