endpoint-definition-designer

Designs primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints for biomedical and clinical research protocols. Always use this skill when a user needs to translate study aims into operational endpoint definitions with event rules, assessment timing, composite logic, interpretability, and protocol-stage auditability. Focus on endpoint precision, feasibility, clinical meaning, ambiguity reduction, and implementation readiness rather than generic study design advice.

Quality

85%

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

Quality

Content

77%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 well-structured, actionable instruction skill with a clear sequenced workflow and exemplary one-level-deep progressive disclosure. The main weakness is conciseness: several sections redundantly restate guidance that appears elsewhere.

Suggestions

Consolidate the Clarification-First Rule section with the clarification-gating reference pointer to remove duplicated gating criteria.

Merge or cross-reference the Core Function 'should/should not' bullets with the Hard Rules so each rule appears once, not twice.

Drop the Sample Triggers section (or trim it to 2 unique triggers) since its examples duplicate the Input Validation examples.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient prose, but several sections redundantly restate one another — the Clarification-First Rule repeats clarification-gating content, Hard Rules restate Core Function 'should/should not' bullets, and Sample Triggers duplicate the Input Validation examples — so it could be tightened; not a 2 (not heavily padded) nor a 4 (multiple genuinely redundant sections remain).	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete executable guidance — an 8-step Decision Logic mapped to specific reference files, a mandatory A–J output structure with table column specs, and 12 hard rules — but lacks a worked example output, leaving a minor gap consistent with anchor 4.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clearly sequenced 8-step workflow with an explicit clarification gate (Step 1), section-to-reference checkpoints, a self-critical review step (Hard Rule 12), and a draft-status feedback label, satisfying the anchor-5 expectation of explicit validation and feedback loops.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Ten reference files, each verified as a one-level-deep leaf with no nested references, are clearly signaled via 'references/x.md → use when...' mappings tied to specific output sections, giving a clean overview with easy navigation.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

92%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.

A strong, third-person description that clearly states both the capability and explicit use-conditions with concrete triggers. Only minor keyword-synonym gaps prevent a perfect trigger-term score.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions — 'Designs primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints', 'event rules, assessment timing, composite logic, interpretability, and protocol-stage auditability' — with comprehensive coverage of the endpoint-design task.	5 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Designs primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints...') and when ('Always use this skill when a user needs to translate study aims into operational endpoint definitions...') with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural keyword coverage ('endpoint definitions', 'study aims', 'event rules', 'composite'), but missing common synonyms a user might say such as 'outcomes' or 'measures'; a few natural terms absent, matching the anchor 4 example.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche — protocol-stage biomedical endpoint framing — with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk against generic study-design skills.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 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/endpoint-definition-designer/SKILL.md
Commit: f5ef65b

Reviewed: ~16 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.