CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tooluniverse-drug-synergy

Drug-combination synergy analysis — quantify whether two drugs together are synergistic, additive, or antagonistic using the standard reference models (Bliss independence, HSA / highest single agent, Loewe additivity, ZIP, and the Chou-Talalay Combination Index). Use when you have measured single-drug and combination effects (inhibition/viability) and need a synergy score. Explains which model to use, what data each one needs, and how to read the score. NOT for looking up pre-computed synergy in a database (use the SYNERGxDB tool / cell-line-profiling skill).

72

Quality

89%

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

The canonical home for this skill is tooluniverse-drug-synergy in mims-harvard/ToolUniverse

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%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 tight, well-structured reference-model skill: compact tables drive model selection, an executable example and supporting script anchor the workflow, and gotchas/limitations are surfaced honestly. Worked examples for the non-Bliss models and an explicit input-validation checkpoint would lift it further.

Suggestions

Add one short worked `tu run` example for a second model (e.g. Loewe or ZIP) so each common case has copy-paste reference, not just Bliss.

Promote the scale-mismatch check into an explicit Step 1 validation checkpoint ("Confirm effects are fractional inhibition 0–1; if % viability, convert with inhibition = 1 − viability/100 before proceeding") rather than only listing it in gotchas.

State the ≥3 measurable dose-point requirement for Loewe/CI/ZIP as a pre-flight check in Step 0/Step 2 so a failed Hill fit is caught before invocation.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean and dense throughout: compact decision tables map data→model→tool→inputs, and the one conceptual sentence ("Synergy only means something relative to a null model of additivity") is the load-bearing insight, not padding — every token earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides a copy-paste executable Bliss command and a script with exact usage, and the Step-0 table lists concrete tool names plus exact input fields per scenario; held back from 5 because only Bliss gets a full worked example while the other models rely on parameter listings.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequenced steps (Step 0 pick model → Step 1 understand additivity → Step 2 run → Step 3 interpret → Step 4 gotchas) with scale-conversion and ceiling-effect caveats surfaced, but validation checkpoints are presented in the gotchas rather than as explicit inline checkpoints in the run flow.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-sectioned overview with a single clearly-signaled one-level-deep reference (scripts/synergy_reference.py, which exists) and a related-skills section; no nesting, easy to navigate, content appropriately split.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

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 precise, third-person description that states concrete capabilities, names the actual models, gives an explicit use-when trigger, and disambiguates from a related pre-computed-synergy skill. Only minor: a couple of natural synonyms could be added for trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple specific concrete actions — "quantify whether two drugs together are synergistic, additive, or antagonistic", "Explains which model to use, what data each one needs, and how to read the score" — and enumerates the actual reference models (Bliss, HSA, Loewe, ZIP, Chou-Talalay CI), giving comprehensive coverage.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: the "what" (quantify synergy/additivity/antagonism via named reference models) and a concrete "when" trigger ("Use when you have measured single-drug and combination effects (inhibition/viability) and need a synergy score"), plus a negative-trigger boundary.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural keywords a user would say — "synergy", "synergistic", "additive", "antagonistic", "combination effects", "inhibition/viability", "synergy score" — with good coverage but a few common synonyms (e.g. "drug interaction", "combination index") not surfaced.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (reference-model synergy scoring) with an explicit negative boundary — "NOT for looking up pre-computed synergy in a database (use the SYNERGxDB tool / cell-line-profiling skill)" — minimizing overlap with the sibling cell-line-profiling skill.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

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.