clinicaltrials-gov-parser
Monitor and summarize competitor clinical trial status changes from ClinicalTrials.gov. Trigger: When user asks to track clinical trials, monitor trial status changes, get updates on specific trials, or analyze competitor trial activities. Use cases: Pharma competitive intelligence, trial monitoring, status tracking, recruitment updates, completion alerts.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill clinicaltrials-gov-parser84
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a well-structured skill description with explicit trigger conditions and clear use cases. The domain is highly specific (clinical trials from ClinicalTrials.gov) which reduces conflict risk. The main weakness is that the core capabilities could be more granular - listing specific actions like 'compare trial phases' or 'generate status change reports' would strengthen specificity.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions such as 'compare trial phases', 'generate status change reports', 'track enrollment numbers', or 'identify newly registered competitor trials' to improve specificity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (clinical trials, ClinicalTrials.gov) and some actions (monitor, summarize, track status changes), but lacks comprehensive specific actions like 'compare trial phases', 'export reports', or 'alert on enrollment milestones'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (monitor and summarize competitor clinical trial status changes) and when (explicit 'Trigger:' clause with multiple scenarios plus 'Use cases:' section providing additional context). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Good coverage of natural terms users would say: 'track clinical trials', 'monitor trial status', 'competitor trial activities', 'recruitment updates', 'completion alerts', and the specific source 'ClinicalTrials.gov'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with specific niche: ClinicalTrials.gov, pharma competitive intelligence, clinical trial monitoring. Unlikely to conflict with general data monitoring or other competitive intelligence skills due to the specific domain focus. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides solid actionable guidance with executable code examples and good progressive disclosure structure. However, it's bloated with boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) that don't help Claude execute the task, and lacks explicit workflow validation steps for monitoring operations.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly reduce boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) that don't provide actionable guidance for Claude
Add explicit workflow with validation checkpoints, e.g., 'After calling check_status_changes(), verify response contains expected fields before processing'
Include error handling examples showing how to handle rate limits and API failures in the monitoring workflow
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes substantial boilerplate sections (Risk Assessment, Security Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Lifecycle Status) that add little value for Claude's execution. The core functionality is reasonably concise, but the document is padded with template content. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable Python code examples and CLI commands that are copy-paste ready. The API methods table and parameter documentation give concrete, specific guidance for implementation. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While individual commands are clear, there's no explicit workflow sequence for monitoring tasks. Missing validation checkpoints - no guidance on verifying API responses, handling rate limits, or confirming successful status change detection. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections and one-level-deep references to external documentation (api-docs.md, status-codes.md, examples.md). Content is appropriately organized with quick-start usage followed by detailed API methods. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.