CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tooluniverse-precision-medicine-stratification

Patient stratification for precision medicine — integrate genomic, clinical, and therapeutic data to split patients into responder/non-responder groups, risk tiers, or treatment-decision groups. Use for stratification-by-biomarker, treatment-selection logic, and personalized therapeutic strategy reports per patient subgroup.

68

Quality

82%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

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

The body is densely actionable with exact tool parameters and a well-sequenced nine-phase workflow, but it is held back by some redundant explanation, missing inter-phase validation, and — most seriously — five heavily-relied-upon reference files that are absent from the bundle.

Suggestions

Add the missing referenced files (TOOLS_REFERENCE.md, SCORING_REFERENCE.md, REPORT_TEMPLATE.md, EXAMPLES.md, QUICK_START.md) to the bundle, or inline the critical scoring/tool content they promise — currently the skill points to content that does not exist.

Insert explicit validation/checkpoint steps between phases (e.g. verify tool results are non-empty and source-referenced before advancing), with a fallback loop for transient failures like gnomAD 'Service overloaded'.

Tighten the opening 'Reasoning Before Searching' section and the KEY PRINCIPLES list to remove the concept restatement and duplication of evidence-grading/source-referencing points covered later.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly operational and dense, but it opens by re-explaining a concept Claude knows ('Stratification means splitting patients into groups...') and the KEY PRINCIPLES list partly duplicates later sections, so it could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Highly concrete for a tool-orchestration skill — exact tool names, specific parameter gotchas (e.g. 'MyGene_query_genes: param is query (NOT q)', DrugBank's four required params), point-range scoring tables, and risk tiers give copy-paste-ready guidance.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear nine-phase numbered sequence with explicit disease-type routing exists, but there are no per-phase validation checkpoints or validate→fix→retry feedback loops between phases.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

References are clearly signaled and one level deep (TOOLS_REFERENCE, SCORING_REFERENCE, REPORT_TEMPLATE, EXAMPLES, QUICK_START), but none of those files actually exist in the bundle, so critical offloaded content is unreachable.

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, complete, and clearly distinct: it names concrete actions, includes an explicit 'Use for' trigger, and occupies a well-bounded niche. Third-person voice is used throughout with no first/second person.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'integrate genomic, clinical, and therapeutic data to split patients into responder/non-responder groups, risk tiers, or treatment-decision groups' — rather than vague language.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly states what it does (integrate data, split into groups, produce strategy reports) and when to use it via an explicit 'Use for stratification-by-biomarker, treatment-selection logic...' clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Covers natural domain terms a user would say — 'patient stratification', 'precision medicine', 'treatment-selection', 'personalized therapeutic strategy' — with good variation.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear precision-medicine stratification niche, and the body explicitly routes adjacent tasks (variant interpretation, immunotherapy prediction, DDI) to other skills, minimizing conflict.

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.