CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

statistical-power

Calculates sample sizes and statistical power for study planning. Applies when someone asks "how many subjects/samples/replicates do I need", wants an a priori power analysis, a minimum detectable effect (MDE), a power curve, or needs to justify a sample size for a grant, IRB protocol, or pre-registration. Covers closed-form power for t-tests, ANOVA, proportions, correlations, chi-square, and regression, plus simulation-based (Monte Carlo) power for complex designs — logistic/Poisson regression, mixed models, cluster-randomized trials, survival, and interactions. Also handles requests that only mention an effect size, alpha, or "80% power" without saying "power analysis" explicitly. For laying out the study (randomization, blocking, factorial/DOE, crossover, sequential designs) use experimental-design; for analyzing data already collected and reporting it use statistical-analysis.

77

Quality

97%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A strong, well-structured body: fully executable code for both the closed-form and simulation paths, a sequenced workflow with genuine validation loops (Type I error check, fresh-seed verification of candidate n), and clean one-level-deep progressive disclosure verified against the actual bundle. The only weakness is minor verbosity — a short textbook recap of what power analysis is and a long administrative citation-fetching procedure that could be tightened or trimmed.

Suggestions

Trim the Overview's background sentences ("Power analysis plans the probability of rejecting..." and "Four quantities are locked together for any given test...") to a one-line framing; Claude already knows the definition, and the skill-specific guidance (inferential-goal caveat) is what adds value.

Condense or move the harness API-behavior detail in the simulation section (TypeError on raw p-values, invalid-count rejection, etc.) into references/simulation_based_power.md, keeping only the usage pattern and the verify-with-fresh-seed loop inline.

Shorten the 'Citing Scientific Agent Skills' fetch-and-verify instructions to the essential citation line plus one sentence on fetching the current record; the detailed arXiv API fallback steps are administrative overhead in the main file.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense with non-obvious procedural knowledge ("n_enroll = ceil(n_analyzed / (1 − dropout_rate))", "The harness's alpha argument does not threshold returned p-values", "DEFF = 1 + (m − 1)·ICC is a planning approximation"), and it assumes domain competence rather than teaching basics. But minor over-explanation could be trimmed: the Overview's textbook statements ("Power analysis plans the probability of rejecting a specified null under an assumed alternative", "Four quantities are locked together for any given test") restate what Claude already knows, and the citation section's version-fetching instructions (~15 lines) are administrative rather than procedural. This fits anchor 4 ('efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed') better than 5 ('every token earns its place'). Not 3: there is no padded section and no tutorial-style hand-holding.

4 / 5

Actionability

Quotes: "from power import sample_size, power, mde, power_curve" with seven complete runnable calls; "est = simulate_power(gen_and_test, n=64, n_sims=2000, alpha=0.05, seed=0)"; the uv pip install commands with exact pins; and a copy-paste reporting template. Code is executable as written (the run-directory caveat is stated: "Run from skills/statistical-power/scripts/ or add that directory to sys.path"), and the common cases (two-group t, 3:1 allocation, ANOVA, proportions, correlation, power curve) are all covered. This matches anchor 5 ('fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases'). Not 4: no gaps remain — even edge conventions (signed effects for one-sided tests, integer-ratio recheck) are specified.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Quotes: the 7-step workflow ("State the design... Choose the effect size... Set α and target power... Compute... Sensitivity analysis... Apply adjustments... Report") with explicit checkpoints and error-recovery loops: "First check Type I error under the null", "A noisy bisection search yields a candidate n: verify nearby sizes with more replicates and a fresh seed", "Recheck power using the realized integer ratio". The reporting template doubles as a completeness checklist. This matches anchor 5 ('clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery'). Not 4: validation is not just mentioned but built into the loop (verify candidate n with fresh seeds). Not a destructive/batch skill, so no cap applies.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is an overview with quick recipes inline, and the bulk detail is split into three real one-level-deep files, each verified to exist and clearly signaled with purpose statements: "references/closed_form_recipes.md — per-test argument conventions and tested statsmodels/Pingouin calls", "references/simulation_based_power.md — full simulation patterns...", "references/effect_sizes.md — choosing effect sizes (SESOI)... ". The reference files do not chain further (only peer-level cross-references), and the Resources section lists every script and reference with a one-line description. This matches anchor 5 ('clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references; content appropriately split; easy navigation'). Not 4: there is no misplaced bulk content — full argument tables, conversion tables, and simulation patterns are all in the reference files rather than inlined.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

An exemplary description: it states concrete capabilities (closed-form and simulation-based power across a named test inventory), provides explicit and varied trigger phrases including indirect ones users say instead of 'power analysis', and cleanly disambiguates from adjacent design/analysis skills. Third-person voice throughout; no fluff or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Quotes: "Calculates sample sizes and statistical power", "a minimum detectable effect (MDE), a power curve", "justify a sample size for a grant, IRB protocol, or pre-registration", "closed-form power for t-tests, ANOVA, proportions, correlations, chi-square, and regression, plus simulation-based (Monte Carlo) power for complex designs — logistic/Poisson regression, mixed models, cluster-randomized trials, survival, and interactions". Multiple specific concrete actions with comprehensive coverage of the domain; this matches the anchor-5 example's breadth ("Extract text and tables from PDF files, fill forms, merge documents, convert pages to images") with an even more detailed capability inventory. Not 4: there are no coverage gaps — both the closed-form and simulation halves of the domain are enumerated test-by-test.

5 / 5

Completeness

Quotes: what — "Calculates sample sizes and statistical power for study planning... Covers closed-form power... plus simulation-based (Monte Carlo) power"; when — "Applies when someone asks 'how many subjects/samples/replicates do I need'... Also handles requests that only mention an effect size, alpha, or '80% power'". Both what and when are explicit, with concrete trigger phrases, exactly matching the anchor-5 example's structure ("Extract text and tables... Use when working with PDF files or when the user mentions PDFs, forms, or document extraction"). Not 4: the 'when' clause is not merely present but enumerated across multiple explicit user phrasings.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes: "how many subjects/samples/replicates do I need", "a priori power analysis", "minimum detectable effect (MDE)", "power curve", "80% power", "effect size", "grant, IRB protocol, or pre-registration". Comprehensive natural-language coverage including synonyms (subjects/samples/replicates) and partial-trigger phrasing users actually say; the explicit note that it also fires on requests that "only mention an effect size, alpha, or '80% power' without saying 'power analysis' explicitly" goes beyond even the anchor-5 example ("PDF files, PDFs, forms, document extraction, .pdf") by covering indirect triggers. Not 4: no common variation is missing.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Quotes: "For laying out the study (randomization, blocking, factorial/DOE, crossover, sequential designs) use experimental-design; for analyzing data already collected and reporting it use statistical-analysis." The description carves out a clear niche (pre-data-collection power/sample-size planning) and explicitly routes the two adjacent tasks to sibling skills, so overlap risk is minimal. Not 4: it does not merely avoid overlap — it actively disambiguates against the two most confusable neighbors. Not below 5: no generic wording remains that would attract unrelated skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills

Path

skills/statistical-power/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.