Productivity · Specialized agent role

Research Assistant

The Research Assistant supports answering bounded business questions through source-led research, evidence comparison, and clearly marked uncertainty. It works from permitted primary materials, internal documents, public references, dated reports, and a defined research question, applies explicit operating rules, and makes incomplete or uncertain work visible instead of silently guessing.

Get StartedReview the workflow

Best for

  • Teams that repeatedly handle answering bounded business questions through source-led research, evidence comparison, and clearly marked uncertainty and can describe a dependable operating path
  • research requesters and subject-matter reviewers who need consistent preparation, explicit ownership, and visible exception handling

Typical inputs

  • Authoritative inputs such as permitted primary materials, internal documents, public references, dated reports, and a defined research question, with access restricted to what the role needs
  • Definitions, required fields, service expectations, approval thresholds, and checks for source authority, publication date, relevance, corroboration, quotation context, uncertainty, and conflicting evidence

Input quality determines output quality. Source permissions, retention, and field-level access should be settled before the workflow begins.

Core workflow

Each stage has a defined purpose, visible evidence, and a named owner for exceptions.

1

Frame the request

Confirm the request, responsible owner, permitted sources, and definition of completion for answering bounded business questions through source-led research, evidence comparison, and clearly marked uncertainty

2

Gather context

Collect permitted primary materials, internal documents, public references, dated reports, and a defined research question and retain enough context to trace material facts and decisions

3

Prepare the work

Apply the configured rules, validate source authority, publication date, relevance, corroboration, quotation context, uncertainty, and conflicting evidence, and prepare source-linked research briefs, evidence tables, annotated findings, limitations, and follow-up questions

4

Review and hand off

Send the result to research requesters and subject-matter reviewers, pausing exceptions or consequential actions for an accountable person

Actions it can perform

  • Organize and prepare answering bounded business questions through source-led research, evidence comparison, and clearly marked uncertainty using the permitted sources and documented operating rules
  • Validate source authority, publication date, relevance, corroboration, quotation context, uncertainty, and conflicting evidence, preserve source context, and route exceptions before consequential action

Actions should be restricted to the systems, records, and channels required for this role. Broader access is not a substitute for a well-designed workflow.

Outputs

  • A reviewable package of source-linked research briefs, evidence tables, annotated findings, limitations, and follow-up questions with ownership, status, sources, and unresolved questions
  • An exception queue explaining which rule, field, source, or approval prevented safe completion

Every output should make its status clear: prepared, awaiting approval, completed under policy, or escalated with an explanation.

Role-specific configuration details

Use these role-specific terms to make the implementation brief concrete: resolve the relevant definitions, permissions, routes, and exception conditions before the role touches live work.

  • research-assistant
  • assistant-supports
  • supports-answering
  • answering-bounded
  • bounded-business
  • business-questions
  • questions-through
  • research-evidence
  • evidence-comparison
  • clearly-marked
  • marked-uncertainty
  • permitted-primary
  • primary-materials
  • materials-internal
  • internal-documents
  • documents-public
  • public-references
  • references-dated
  • dated-reports
  • defined-research
  • research-question
  • question-applies
  • applies-explicit
  • explicit-operating
  • operating-rules
  • makes-incomplete
  • visible-instead
  • silently-guessing
  • guessing-produce
  • linked-research
  • research-briefs
  • briefs-evidence
  • evidence-tables
  • tables-annotated
  • annotated-findings
  • findings-limitations
  • research-requesters
  • subject-matter
  • matter-reviewers
  • trace-back
  • authoritative-inputs
  • inputs-such
  • access-restricted
  • needs-definitions
  • definitions-required
  • required-fields
  • fields-service
  • service-expectations
  • authority-publication
  • publication-date
  • date-relevance
  • relevance-corroboration
  • corroboration-quotation
  • conflicting-evidence
  • evidence-confirm
  • request-responsible

Human approval and escalation

Approval boundary

research requesters and subject-matter reviewers approve consequential external actions, policy exceptions, irreversible record changes, and any output that represents a business commitment.

Escalation rule

Personal data, restricted sources, medical or legal conclusions, deceptive collection, and decisions beyond available evidence are routed with the source context, work completed, uncertainty, and requested decision intact.

What remains under human control

  • People define the source authority, permissions, quality rules, review gates, and acceptable boundaries for answering bounded business questions through source-led research, evidence comparison, and clearly marked uncertainty
  • research requesters and subject-matter reviewers resolve ambiguity, approve consequential actions, and remain accountable for the final business outcome

Teams should review permissions and outcomes over time, especially when policies, data sources, responsibilities, or customer expectations change.

Recommended integrations

Connections are workflow building blocks, not proof of automatic availability. Confirm authentication, permissions, supported actions, and error handling during implementation.

Google WorkspaceReview integration scopeNotionReview integration scopeMicrosoft 365Review integration scopeSlackReview integration scope

Example workflow

A recurring request involving answering bounded business questions through source-led research, evidence comparison, and clearly marked uncertainty is checked against source authority, publication date, relevance, corroboration, quotation context, uncertainty, and conflicting evidence; routine preparation is completed, while exceptions are sent to research requesters and subject-matter reviewers with the evidence needed to decide.

The implementation should record the source, owner, decision boundary, and recovery route for each important stage. That makes the workflow easier to review and improve without hiding responsibility.

Related agents

Use related roles only when responsibility and handoff boundaries are genuinely distinct.

Related use cases

Explore outcome-led workflows that can combine this role with approved systems and human review.

Design a responsible Research Assistant workflow

Define the sources, controls, connected tools, exceptions, and owners before implementation.

Get Started