case-control-study-planner

Design a structured case-control study framework with explicit source population logic, control selection rules, matching decisions, exposure measurement planning, and bias-control checkpoints.

Quality

76%

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 ./awesome-med-research-skills/Protocol Design/case-control-study-planner/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

78%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 is a well-structured, actionable design-planning skill with a clear sequenced workflow and exemplary one-level-deep reference integration; its main weakness is redundant cautionary content repeated across several sections.

Suggestions

Merge the overlapping cautionary content from "What This Skill Is Not For", "Hard Rules", and "What This Skill Should Not Do" into a single consolidated discipline section to reduce repetition.

Consider adding one brief worked-example output sketch (a short filled-in section A–L) to anchor the mandatory structure concretely.

Tighten the redundant restatements of the odds-ratio/risk-ratio and no-fabrication rules so each appears once in its authoritative section.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The domain guidance is mostly efficient, but the same cautions (odds ratios ≠ risk ratios, no fabrication, matching discipline) recur across "What This Skill Is Not For", "Hard Rules", and "What This Skill Should Not Do", which could be consolidated.	3 / 5
Actionability	Highly actionable for an instruction-only skill: a 10-step execution logic with explicit sub-items, a 12-section mandatory output template (A–L), formatting rules, and concrete sample triggers give Claude everything needed to execute.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 10-step sequence is present with input-validation and design-fit gating checkpoints plus a closing Quality Standard checklist; no error-recovery feedback loop, but none is applicable to a design-planning skill.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A clean overview points to five numbered reference modules (01–05), each with a "Use to/Use when" signal, one level deep — and all five referenced files exist in ./references/, enabling easy navigation.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

75%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 is specific and distinct, laying out concrete framework components in a clear niche, but it omits an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause, leaving the activation conditions implicit and capping completeness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause naming the situations that should activate this skill (e.g., designing a retrospective case-control study, choosing controls for a rare outcome).

Include a few natural trigger synonyms users might say, such as "case-control design", "control selection", or "matched case-control", to broaden trigger coverage.

Optionally signal scope boundaries (e.g., "not for cohort designs or full protocol drafting") in the description to further reduce misactivation.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete design actions — "explicit source population logic, control selection rules, matching decisions, exposure measurement planning, and bias-control checkpoints" — giving comprehensive coverage of the framework's components.	5 / 5
Completeness	Has a clear "what" (designing a structured case-control study framework) but no explicit "when"/"Use when" clause, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural epidemiology keywords ("case-control study", "controls", "matching", "exposure measurement") that users would say, but lacks common synonyms and an explicit trigger phrasing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"case-control study framework" carves out a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk against other research-design skills.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: aipoch/medical-research-skills
Path: awesome-med-research-skills/Protocol Design/case-control-study-planner/SKILL.md
Commit: f5ef65b

Reviewed: ~13 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.