Best practices for high-quality research skills with evidence grading and source attribution.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versiondevtu-optimize-skillsExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches devtu-optimize-skills from mims-harvard/tooluniverse and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate devtu-optimize-skills. Access via /devtu-optimize-skills in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
0
total installs
0
this week
1.2K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
1.2K
stars
Best practices for high-quality research skills with evidence grading and source attribution.
python3 -m tooluniverse.cli run <Tool> '<json>' to verifyFull details: references/optimization-patterns.md
| # | Pattern | Key Idea |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tool Interface Verification | get_tool_info() before first call; maintain corrections table |
| 2 | Foundation Data Layer | Query aggregator (Open Targets, PubChem) FIRST |
| 3 | Versioned Identifiers | Capture both ENSG00000123456 and .12 version |
| 4 | Disambiguation First | Resolve IDs, detect collisions, build negative filters |
| 5 | Report-Only Output | Narrative in report; methodology in appendix only if asked |
| 6 | Evidence Grading | T1 (mechanistic) → T2 (functional) → T3 (association) → T4 (mention) |
| 7 | Quantified Completeness | Numeric minimums per section (>=20 PPIs, top 10 tissues) |
| 8 | Mandatory Checklist | All sections exist, even if "Limited evidence" |
| 9 | Aggregated Data Gaps | Single section consolidating all missing data |
| 10 | Query Strategy | High-precision seeds → citation expansion → collision-filtered broad |
| 11 | Tool Failure Handling | Primary → Fallback 1 → Fallback 2 → document unavailable |
| 12 | Scalable Output | Narrative report + JSON/CSV bibliography |
| 13 | Synthesis Sections | Biological model + testable hypotheses, not just paper lists |
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)
Full details: references/testing-standards.md
Critical rule: NEVER write skill docs without testing all tool calls first.
operation parameterSkills 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:
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) |
Every multi-phase skill needs a final phase that answers "so what?" — not just collecting data:
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."
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).
| Gap | Procedure | Packages |
|---|---|---|
| API doesn't return needed data (e.g., DepMap scores) | Download CSV + pandas analysis | pandas |
| Statistical testing (differential abundance, enrichment) | scipy.stats + FDR correction | scipy, statsmodels |
| Sequence analysis (alignment, conservation) | Biopython SeqIO + pairwise alignment | biopython |
| Chemical similarity (analog search, fingerprints) | RDKit fingerprints + Tanimoto | rdkit (visualization extra) |
| Network analysis (hub genes, clustering) | NetworkX graph metrics | networkx |
| Scoring algorithms (ACMG classification, viability scores) | Custom Python functions | built-in |
| Dose feasibility (Cmax vs IC50 comparison) | Numerical comparison + PK data | pandas, numpy |
**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]
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:
| Dataset | Download URL | Files | Used By |
|---|---|---|---|
| DepMap CRISPR | depmap.org/portal/download/all/ | CRISPRGeneEffect.csv (~300MB), Model.csv (~2MB) | functional-genomics, cell-line-profiling |
| TCGA clinical | portal.gdc.cancer.gov | Clinical + mutation TSVs | cancer-genomics-tcga |
| GTEx expression | gtexportal.org/home/downloads | GTEx_Analysis_v8_Annotations.csv | expression-data-retrieval |
| ClinGen gene-disease | clinicalgenome.org/docs/ | gene_curation_list.tsv | variant-interpretation |
| gnomAD constraint | gnomad.broadinstitute.org/downloads | constraint metrics TSV | functional-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.
| Anti-Pattern | Fix |
|---|---|
| "Search Log" reports | Keep methodology internal; report findings only |
| Missing disambiguation | Add collision detection; build negative filters |
| No evidence grading | Apply T1-T4 grades; label each claim |
| Empty sections omitted | Include with "None identified" |
| No synthesis | Add biological model + hypotheses |
| Silent failures | Document in Data Gaps; implement fallbacks |
| Wrong tool parameters | Verify via get_tool_info() before calling |
| GTEx returns nothing | Try versioned ID ENSG*.version |
| No foundation layer | Query aggregator first |
| Untested tool calls | Test-driven: test script FIRST |
| Tool catalog without interpretation | Add interpretation tables explaining what data means |
| Aspirational capabilities | Be honest when APIs can't deliver; add computational procedure instead |
| Missing statistical analysis | Add scipy/pandas code procedure for computation the tools can't do |
| Complaint | Fix |
|---|---|
| "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 |
---
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]
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
JuliusBrussee/caveman
JuliusBrussee/caveman
whyashthakker/agent-skills-marketing
mattpocock/skills
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
cursor/plugins
I recommend devtu-optimize-skills for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
devtu-optimize-skills fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: devtu-optimize-skills is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
devtu-optimize-skills has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
devtu-optimize-skills is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
devtu-optimize-skills reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
Useful defaults in devtu-optimize-skills — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
devtu-optimize-skills has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Registry listing for devtu-optimize-skills matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: devtu-optimize-skills is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 47