basic-research-design

A biomedical research topic designer that generates progressive experimental subtitles and detailed research outlines based on a given subject. Use when the user wants to design a research proposal, outline experiments for a topic, or structure a biomedical study.

Quality

55%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./scientific-skills/Protocol Design/basic-research-design/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

31%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.

The body has a genuinely useful two-step workflow with concrete quality rules, but it is buried under large amounts of generic boilerplate and critically depends on references/prompt_templates.md which is not shipped, breaking both actionability and navigation.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced references/prompt_templates.md file (or inline the Subtitle Generation and Research Outline Generation prompts into SKILL.md) so the workflow's delegated prompts actually exist.

Remove the generic boilerplate sections (Dependencies, Implementation Details, Output Contract, Failure Handling, Quick Validation) that restate what Claude already knows; keep only skill-specific guidance and the Workflow.

Fix the 'See ## Workflow above' reference in Implementation Details (Workflow is below) and add an explicit validation checkpoint between Step 1 and Step 2 (e.g., confirm exactly 6 progressive subtitles before generating the outline).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Most of the body is generic templated boilerplate ('validate the request, choose the packaged workflow, and produce a bounded deliverable', Dependencies, Output Contract, Failure Handling) that pads rather than teaches; only the Workflow section is skill-specific, matching the noticeably-verbose anchor.	2 / 5
Actionability	The two workflow steps delegate the actual prompts to 'references/prompt_templates.md', but no references/ directory exists, so the executable guidance is a dead reference leaving only high-level hints — matching minimal concrete guidance.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear two-step sequence (generate subtitles, then generate outline using Step 1 output) is present with explicit data dependency, but validation checkpoints are only implicit and 'See ## Workflow above' points the wrong way, matching the steps-listed-but-checkpoints-missing anchor.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The SKILL.md signals a one-level reference to references/prompt_templates.md, but that file and directory are absent, so navigation dead-ends; the prompt content that belongs in a separate file is neither inline nor reachable, matching minimal/broken structure.	2 / 5
	Total	9 / 20 Passed

Description

78%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.

The description clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it with concrete trigger phrases, and carves out a reasonably distinct biomedical niche. Its main weakness is modest action specificity — only two concrete operations are named.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and two concrete actions — 'generates progressive experimental subtitles and detailed research outlines' — which matches the 1-2 concrete-actions anchor; it does not list several actions, so it is not a 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly states both what it does ('generates progressive experimental subtitles and detailed research outlines') and when to use it ('Use when the user wants to design a research proposal...'), with concrete trigger phrases matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'design a research proposal, outline experiments for a topic, or structure a biomedical study' gives good natural keyword coverage a user would say, but lacks synonyms/common variations needed for a 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'biomedical research topic designer' is a clear niche with distinct triggers, but there is minor overlap risk with general research/writing skills, so it is mostly distinct rather than fully distinct.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 4 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: aipoch/medical-research-skills
Path: scientific-skills/Protocol Design/basic-research-design/SKILL.md
Commit: 63c61d3

Reviewed: 4 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.