CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tooluniverse-adverse-event-detection

Detect and analyze adverse drug event signals using FDA FAERS reports, drug labels, and disproportionality statistics (PRR, ROR, IC). Generates quantitative safety signal scores (0-100) with evidence grading. Use for post-market surveillance, pharmacovigilance, drug safety assessment, regulatory submissions, and detecting rare AE signals not visible in clinical trials.

61

Quality

71%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugin/skills/tooluniverse-adverse-event-detection/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

42%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content shows a well-structured ten-phase workflow with concrete tool names and thresholds, but it is fundamentally incomplete because every detailed artifact it points to (phase details, scoring rubric, report template, tool reference) is a referenced file that does not exist. This broken progressive disclosure, combined with missing executable code and inter-phase validation checkpoints, caps several dimensions at 2.

Suggestions

Add the four referenced bundle files (PHASE_DETAILS.md, REPORT_TEMPLATE.md, TOOL_REFERENCE.md, QUICK_START.md) so the deferred signal-classification table, 0-100 scoring rubric, executable Python examples, and report template are actually reachable.

Include at least one copy-paste-ready executable code example for the disproportionality computation (PRR/ROR/IC with confidence intervals) directly in SKILL.md or its referenced phase-details file, rather than only naming the tools.

Insert explicit validation checkpoints between phases (e.g. confirm N>=3 and lower CI > 1.0 before classifying a signal; branch to the 'No FAERS reports' path after Phase 1) so the batch workflow has feedback loops for error recovery.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and mostly high-signal (exact thresholds like 'PRR >= 2.0, N >= 3, lower CI > 1.0', tool names, scoring component weights) without explaining concepts Claude already knows, but it is long and defers key tables and formulae to external files, so it could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

It names specific tools and exact signal criteria, which is actionable for tool selection, but all executable Python code and the actual 0-100 scoring rubric are deferred to PHASE_DETAILS.md — providing some concrete guidance but missing key executable details.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The ten-phase pipeline is clearly sequenced with an ASCII flow diagram and an edge-cases section, but this batch analysis lacks explicit inter-phase validation checkpoints (e.g. verify N>=3 before proceeding), which the rubric says should cap workflow clarity at 2 for batch operations.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The body explicitly defers the signal-classification table, scoring rubric, code examples, and report template to PHASE_DETAILS.md, REPORT_TEMPLATE.md, TOOL_REFERENCE.md, and QUICK_START.md, but none of these referenced files actually exist in the bundle, so the promised one-level-deep detail is unreachable.

1 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

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 concrete, third-person, and free of over-claims, explicitly covering both capabilities and trigger scenarios with strong domain vocabulary. It is a well-scoped, high-quality skill description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions ('Detect and analyze adverse drug event signals', 'Generates quantitative safety signal scores (0-100) with evidence grading') with named data sources (FAERS, drug labels) and statistics (PRR, ROR, IC), matching the anchor for listing multiple specific concrete actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (detect/quantify/grade safety signals) and when via an explicit 'Use for ...' clause listing concrete scenarios, matching the anchor for clearly answering both with explicit triggers.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Covers natural terms users would say — 'post-market surveillance', 'pharmacovigilance', 'drug safety assessment', 'regulatory submissions', 'adverse drug event signals' — giving good coverage rather than technical jargon.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche — FAERS disproportionality analysis plus a quantitative Safety Signal Score — that is unlikely to trigger the wrong skill; the body even differentiates it from a sibling pharmacovigilance skill.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
mims-harvard/ToolUniverse
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.