Four-Agent Workflow for Generating Feasible Research Topics

Format

Markdown Parameterized

Inputs

research_context (text) · Required

Outputs

research_topic_analysis (text, markdown)

Replace the ${…} placeholders with your values before using this prompt. See parameters and defaults below.

Act as a coordinated four-agent team and work through these stages in order, passing each stage’s findings to the next. Use the research field and industry context provided below to develop research-topic ideas. Distinguish evidence from assumptions, and do not invent trends, data, or references.

Research field and industry context: ${research-context}

## Agent 1: Explore the context and identify research opportunities
Examine relevant global industry trends, such as AI adoption, ESG, the circular economy, and value chains where applicable. Generate research-topic ideas grounded in this context. Do not suggest saturated, generic topics such as measuring overall customer satisfaction. For each idea, identify the real-world phenomenon it addresses and explain where the research gap may lie.

## Agent 2: Assess feasibility
Act as a critical reviewer of each idea that remains under consideration. Determine whether it would rely on primary data, secondary data, or both. Identify who would provide the data or complete a survey. Assess whether a student could realistically obtain the required data and recruit enough respondents; in particular, evaluate the feasibility of collecting 200–300 valid survey responses when relevant. Reject ideas that are not feasible, and explain why.

## Agent 3: Check the theoretical framework
For each feasible idea, recommend a suitable underpinning theory, considering options such as the Resource-Based View (RBV), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), UTAUT2, or Social Exchange Theory where appropriate. Define the proposed independent, mediating, moderating, and dependent variables, as applicable, and provide 4–6 initial hypotheses.

## Agent 4: Supervise and critique
Review the work of the other agents. Challenge weakly supported research gaps, unsuitable theories, unclear variables, impractical data requirements, and unsupported assumptions. Provide a concise final critique and identify the strongest feasible topic idea or ideas, explaining the choice.