CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tooluniverse-epigenomics

Genomics and epigenomics analysis: DNA methylation (CpG, 5mC, 5hmC, bisulfite, RRBS), m6A RNA modification (MeRIP-seq), ChIP-seq peaks, ATAC-seq accessibility, histone modifications, chromatin state, multi-omics integration. Combines pandas/scipy/pysam computation with ToolUniverse annotation tools. Use for genome-wide epigenomic statistics, methylation analysis, and chromatin-genome integration.

68

Quality

81%

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

62%

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

The body provides a strong, well-sequenced workflow with explicit sanity-check feedback loops and a concrete primary script, but it is held back by repeated rows-vs-sites explanation, descriptive secondary phases, and references to four bundle files that are missing.

Suggestions

Consolidate the rows-vs-sites guidance, which is currently explained in three places with two overlapping question-phrasing tables, into a single section to cut redundancy.

Provide the missing referenced files (CODE_REFERENCE.md, TOOLS_REFERENCE.md, ANALYSIS_PROCEDURES.md, QUICK_START.md) or remove the references and inline the necessary detail, since the bundle currently contains only scripts/methylation_density.py.

Add executable code snippets for the Phase 1–7 analyses (e.g., differential methylation, chromosome density) rather than high-level bullets, given that the detailed implementations are delegated to a nonexistent CODE_REFERENCE.md.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient domain-specific guidance, but the rows-vs-sites pitfall is explained three times (TOP-OF-MIND RULE, PRIMARY SCRIPT section, and the "Distinguish rows vs unique sites" section) with two overlapping question-phrasing tables that could be merged, so it fits the score-2 "could be tightened" anchor rather than the lean score-3 anchor.

2 / 3

Actionability

The primary script invocation is fully executable and copy-paste ready ("python skills/.../methylation_density.py --cpg ... --chr-lengths ... --filter-meth-extremes 90 10") with a concrete output-field table, but Phases 1–7 are high-level bullets (e.g., "Differential methylation: T-test/Wilcoxon between groups + FDR") and delegate implementations to CODE_REFERENCE.md, which is not present in the bundle, leaving key details missing as in the score-2 anchor.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced Phase 0–7 workflow with RULE ZERO precedence and explicit feedback loops ("Sanity check: if your filtered count is two orders of magnitude smaller than the GT range ... Re-run with the other axis and compare") matches the score-3 anchor of clear sequence with explicit validation and error-recovery checkpoints; operations are analytical/read-only rather than destructive, so the destructive-cap does not apply.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

References are one-level-deep and clearly signaled (inline "See CODE_REFERENCE.md" plus a Reference Files list), but four referenced files (CODE_REFERENCE.md, TOOLS_REFERENCE.md, ANALYSIS_PROCEDURES.md, QUICK_START.md) do not exist in the bundle — only scripts/methylation_density.py is present — so navigation leads nowhere and the structure is only partly realized, fitting the score-2 "could be better organized" anchor rather than the well-split score-3 anchor.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

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 specific, trigger-rich, and complete, naming concrete epigenomics capabilities with an explicit Use-for clause and a distinctive niche. It is a strong, concise skill description.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete analysis capabilities ("DNA methylation (CpG, 5mC, 5hmC, bisulfite, RRBS), m6A RNA modification (MeRIP-seq), ChIP-seq peaks, ATAC-seq accessibility, histone modifications, chromatin state, multi-omics integration") and concrete actions ("genome-wide epigenomic statistics, methylation analysis, and chromatin-genome integration"), matching the score-3 anchor of multiple specific concrete actions rather than the partial score-2 anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both what (the enumerated analysis types) and when via the explicit trigger clause "Use for genome-wide epigenomic statistics, methylation analysis, and chromatin-genome integration," satisfying the "Use when…" equivalent guidance that would otherwise cap completeness at 2.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Contains natural terms a genomics user would actually say ("DNA methylation", "CpG", "ChIP-seq", "ATAC-seq", "histone", "methylation analysis", "multi-omics") with broad coverage including common variations, so it sits above the score-2 "some relevant keywords but missing common variations" anchor.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear epigenomics/epitranscriptomics niche with distinct triggers (methylation, ChIP-seq, ATAC-seq, histone, chromatin state) unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, fitting the score-3 "clear niche with distinct triggers" anchor rather than the score-2 overlap anchor.

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.