CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

nhanes-clinical-retrospective-biomarker-research-planner

Generates complete NHANES-style cross-sectional epidemiology + retrospective clinical validation research designs from a user-provided disease and biomarker direction. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a population-level biomarker association study using NHANES or similar survey datasets, especially when the article logic includes disease definition, biomarker formula derivation, multivariable logistic regression, restricted cubic spline analysis, subgroup stability testing, and a secondary hospital-based retrospective validation cohort. Covers five study patterns (cross-sectional association, dose-response / RCS, subgroup-stability, NHANES + retrospective validation, preliminary screening-performance) and always outputs four workload configs (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path...

69

Quality

85%

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

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 strong workflow sequencing and excellent progressive disclosure via real reference files. Its main weakness is redundancy between the execution steps and the Hard Rules section.

Suggestions

Consolidate the 'Hard Rules' section: remove rules that merely restate Step 5 (dependency checks) and the section mandates (rules 16, 18, 22, 25), keeping only genuinely additional constraints to reduce redundancy.

Tighten the long run-on opening description sentence and the repeated 'mandatory' framing across steps to improve token efficiency.

Add a single explicit final self-check step that verifies all mandatory sections A–J are present before output, making the existing implicit checklist an explicit validation gate.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and dense with actionable specifics, but the 23-item 'Hard Rules' section substantially restates the step instructions (e.g., rules 16/18/22/25 duplicate Step 5 and the section mandates), adding padding that could be trimmed.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete guidance — input format, study-pattern and workload-config tables, verbatim redirect text, explicit dependency formulas, and mandatory A–J output sections with required elements — with only minor gaps where detail is deferred to reference files.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 7-step ordered sequence includes an explicit mandatory validation checkpoint (Step 5 dependency consistency check) with a revise-before-output feedback loop, plus the mandatory-sections list acting as a checklist.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references to eight real references/*.md files (all verified present), with content appropriately split into pattern logic, configs, templates, and module libraries.

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 concretely states capabilities and gives explicit trigger guidance for a well-scoped niche. Trigger-term coverage is good but not exhaustive of natural synonyms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'Generates...research designs', 'Covers five study patterns', and 'outputs four workload configs...with recommended primary plan, step-by-step workflow, figure plan, validation strategy, minimal executable version, publication upgrade path' — giving comprehensive coverage.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (generates designs, five patterns, four configs) and 'when' ('Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build...') with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural trigger terms users would say ('design, plan, or build', 'biomarker association study', 'NHANES', 'survey datasets') with good coverage, but a few common synonyms/variations are absent so it is not a 5.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (NHANES-style biomarker association studies with retrospective validation) with distinct, specific triggers and minimal overlap with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
aipoch/medical-research-skills
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.