CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

devtu-optimize-skills

Optimize ToolUniverse skills for better report quality, evidence handling, and user experience. Apply patterns like tool verification, foundation data layers, disambiguation-first, evidence grading, quantified completeness, and report-only output. Use when reviewing skills, improving existing skills, or creating new ToolUniverse research skills.

63

Quality

73%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/devtu-optimize-skills/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Optimizing ToolUniverse Skills

Best practices for high-quality research skills with evidence grading and source attribution.

Tool Quality Standards

  1. Error messages must be actionable — tell the user what went wrong AND what to do
  2. Schema must match API reality — run python3 -m tooluniverse.cli run <Tool> '<json>' to verify
  3. Coverage transparency — state what data is NOT included
  4. Input validation before API calls — don't silently send invalid values
  5. Cross-tool routing — name the correct tool when query is out-of-scope
  6. No silent parameter dropping — if a parameter is ignored, say so

Core Principles (13 Patterns)

Full details: references/optimization-patterns.md

#PatternKey Idea
1Tool Interface Verificationget_tool_info() before first call; maintain corrections table
2Foundation Data LayerQuery aggregator (Open Targets, PubChem) FIRST
3Versioned IdentifiersCapture both ENSG00000123456 and .12 version
4Disambiguation FirstResolve IDs, detect collisions, build negative filters
5Report-Only OutputNarrative in report; methodology in appendix only if asked
6Evidence GradingT1 (mechanistic) → T2 (functional) → T3 (association) → T4 (mention)
7Quantified CompletenessNumeric minimums per section (>=20 PPIs, top 10 tissues)
8Mandatory ChecklistAll sections exist, even if "Limited evidence"
9Aggregated Data GapsSingle section consolidating all missing data
10Query StrategyHigh-precision seeds → citation expansion → collision-filtered broad
11Tool Failure HandlingPrimary → Fallback 1 → Fallback 2 → document unavailable
12Scalable OutputNarrative report + JSON/CSV bibliography
13Synthesis SectionsBiological model + testable hypotheses, not just paper lists

Optimized Skill Workflow

Phase -1: Tool Verification (check params)
Phase  0: Foundation Data (aggregator query)
Phase  1: Disambiguation (IDs, collisions, baseline)
Phase  2: Specialized Queries (fill gaps)
Phase  3: Report Synthesis (evidence-graded narrative)

Testing Standards

Full details: references/testing-standards.md

Critical rule: NEVER write skill docs without testing all tool calls first.

  • 30+ tests per skill, 100% pass rate
  • All tests use real data (no placeholders)
  • Phase + integration + edge case tests
  • SOAP tools (IMGT, SAbDab, TheraSAbDab) need operation parameter
  • Distinguish transient errors (retry) from real bugs (fix)
  • API docs are often wrong — always verify with actual calls

Pattern 14: Reasoning Frameworks Over Tool Catalogs (CRITICAL)

Skills that just list tools ("call A, then B, then C") score 3-5/10 in usefulness tests. Skills that explain HOW to interpret and combine data score 7-9/10. Every skill MUST include:

14a. Interpretation Tables

Map raw API data to biological/clinical meaning. Don't just retrieve — explain.

Bad (tool catalog)Good (reasoning framework)
"Get GO terms from MGnify"GO terms → interpretation table: butyrate genes = barrier integrity, LPS genes = inflammation
"Get DepMap dependency scores"Score < -0.5 = essential, but pan-essential = bad drug target (toxicity); selective = good target
"Get FAERS counts"PRR > 5 = strong signal, but signal ≠ causation (channeling bias, notoriety bias)

14b. Synthesis Phases

Every multi-phase skill needs a final phase that answers "so what?" — not just collecting data:

  • "What changed and why does it matter?"
  • "Is this cause or consequence?"
  • "What's the actionable recommendation?"

14c. Honest Limitations

If a tool API can't deliver what the skill promises, say so explicitly. Don't describe aspirational capabilities. Example: "DepMap_get_gene_dependencies returns gene metadata only, NOT per-cell-line CRISPR scores."

Pattern 15: Computational Procedures When Tools Can't Help

Some scientific analyses require computation, not just API queries. When no tool exists for a capability, embed a Python code procedure directly in the skill using packages available in ToolUniverse (pandas, scipy, numpy, statsmodels, biopython, networkx).

When to use computational procedures:

GapProcedurePackages
API doesn't return needed data (e.g., DepMap scores)Download CSV + pandas analysispandas
Statistical testing (differential abundance, enrichment)scipy.stats + FDR correctionscipy, statsmodels
Sequence analysis (alignment, conservation)Biopython SeqIO + pairwise alignmentbiopython
Chemical similarity (analog search, fingerprints)RDKit fingerprints + Tanimotordkit (visualization extra)
Network analysis (hub genes, clustering)NetworkX graph metricsnetworkx
Scoring algorithms (ACMG classification, viability scores)Custom Python functionsbuilt-in
Dose feasibility (Cmax vs IC50 comparison)Numerical comparison + PK datapandas, numpy

Template for computational procedures in skills:

**Computational procedure: [Name]**
[When to use this: explain the gap it fills]

\`\`\`python
# [What this computes]
# Requires: [packages] (included in ToolUniverse dependencies)
import pandas as pd
from scipy.stats import mannwhitneyu

# Input: [describe expected input format]
# Output: [describe output]
# [Full working code with example data]
\`\`\`

[Interpretation guidance for the output]

Key rules for computational procedures:

  1. Only use packages in ToolUniverse dependencies (pyproject.toml): pandas, scipy, numpy, networkx, requests, biopython (optional extra)
  2. Include example data so the procedure is immediately testable
  3. Explain the output — a code block without interpretation is useless
  4. Note when external data download is needed (e.g., DepMap CSV from depmap.org)

Pattern 15b: Download-and-Process for Datasets Without REST APIs

Many critical scientific datasets have NO REST API but provide bulk download files. Skills should include concrete download-and-process instructions when this is the only path to essential data.

Template for download-and-process procedures:

**Step 1: Download data files**
- URL: [exact download page URL]
- Files needed: [filename] (~[size]) — [what it contains]
- Registration: [required/not required]
- Update frequency: [quarterly/annually/etc.]

**Step 2: Process with Python**
[Working code with pandas/scipy that loads the CSV and produces the analysis]

**Step 3: Interpret results**
[Table mapping output values to biological/clinical meaning]

**When files are not available**: [Fallback strategy using API tools]

Known download-only datasets that skills reference:

DatasetDownload URLFilesUsed By
DepMap CRISPRdepmap.org/portal/download/all/CRISPRGeneEffect.csv (~300MB), Model.csv (~2MB)functional-genomics, cell-line-profiling
TCGA clinicalportal.gdc.cancer.govClinical + mutation TSVscancer-genomics-tcga
GTEx expressiongtexportal.org/home/downloadsGTEx_Analysis_v8_Annotations.csvexpression-data-retrieval
ClinGen gene-diseaseclinicalgenome.org/docs/gene_curation_list.tsvvariant-interpretation
gnomAD constraintgnomad.broadinstitute.org/downloadsconstraint metrics TSVfunctional-genomics

Critical rule: Always include a fallback for when the download is unavailable (user may not have registration, file may be too large, etc.). The fallback should use available API tools even if they provide less complete data.

Common Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternFix
"Search Log" reportsKeep methodology internal; report findings only
Missing disambiguationAdd collision detection; build negative filters
No evidence gradingApply T1-T4 grades; label each claim
Empty sections omittedInclude with "None identified"
No synthesisAdd biological model + hypotheses
Silent failuresDocument in Data Gaps; implement fallbacks
Wrong tool parametersVerify via get_tool_info() before calling
GTEx returns nothingTry versioned ID ENSG*.version
No foundation layerQuery aggregator first
Untested tool callsTest-driven: test script FIRST
Tool catalog without interpretationAdd interpretation tables explaining what data means
Aspirational capabilitiesBe honest when APIs can't deliver; add computational procedure instead
Missing statistical analysisAdd scipy/pandas code procedure for computation the tools can't do

Quick Fixes for User Complaints

ComplaintFix
"Report too short"Add Phase 0 foundation + Phase 1 disambiguation
"Too much noise"Add collision filtering
"Can't tell what's important"Add T1-T4 evidence tiers
"Missing sections"Add mandatory checklist with minimums
"Too long/unreadable"Separate narrative from JSON
"Just a list of papers"Add synthesis sections
"Tool failed, no data"Add retry + fallback chains

Skill Template

---
name: [domain]-research
description: [What + when triggers]
---

# [Domain] Research

## Workflow
Phase -1: Tool Verification → Phase 0: Foundation → Phase 1: Disambiguate
→ Phase 2: Search → Phase 3: Report

## Phase -1: Tool Verification
[Parameter corrections table]

## Phase 0: Foundation Data
[Aggregator query]

## Phase 1: Disambiguation
[IDs, collisions, baseline]

## Phase 2: Specialized Queries
[Query strategy, fallbacks]

## Phase 3: Report Synthesis
[Evidence grading, mandatory sections]

## Output Files
- [topic]_report.md, [topic]_bibliography.json

## Quantified Minimums
[Numbers per section]

## Completeness Checklist
[Required sections with checkboxes]

Additional References

Repository
mims-harvard/ToolUniverse
Last updated
First committed

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.