tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design

mims-harvard/tooluniverse · updated Apr 8, 2026

MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.

$npx skills add https://github.com/mims-harvard/tooluniverse --skill tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design
0 commentsdiscussion
summary

Systematically assess clinical trial feasibility by analyzing 6 research dimensions. Produces comprehensive feasibility reports with quantitative enrollment projections, endpoint recommendations, and regulatory pathway analysis.

skill.md

Clinical Trial Design Feasibility Assessment

Systematically assess clinical trial feasibility by analyzing 6 research dimensions. Produces comprehensive feasibility reports with quantitative enrollment projections, endpoint recommendations, and regulatory pathway analysis.

IMPORTANT: Always use English terms in tool calls (drug names, disease names, biomarker names), even if the user writes in another language. Only try original-language terms as a fallback if English returns no results. Respond in the user's language.

Reasoning Before Searching

Trial design starts with the question, not the methods. Answer these four questions before running any tools — they determine everything else:

  1. What is the primary endpoint? Is it overall survival (gold standard but slow), PFS (faster but surrogate), ORR (single-arm friendly but not always accepted), or a biomarker (needs validation as surrogate first)? The endpoint determines FDA pathway, statistical design, and duration.
  2. Who is the population? Broad unselected vs. biomarker-enriched. Enriched populations have higher response rates, allowing smaller trials — but require a validated companion diagnostic and reduce the eligible patient pool.
  3. What is the comparator? Placebo (only if no standard of care exists), active control (requires non-inferiority or superiority framing), or single-arm with historical control (acceptable for rare diseases or breakthrough designations, but FDA scrutiny is high).
  4. Is the effect size realistic given the mechanism? A 20% improvement in ORR over SOC requires ~100 patients per arm. A 50% improvement requires ~30. If the mechanism only justifies a 10% improvement, the trial may be underpowered regardless of design. Check precedent effect sizes in similar trials before committing to an endpoint.

These four answers determine sample size, duration, and trial design. Look them up from precedent trials and FDA guidance — do not derive them from first principles.

LOOK UP DON'T GUESS: Never assume what the standard of care is for an indication — look it up with DrugBank and FDA tools. Never assume an endpoint is FDA-accepted — verify with search_clinical_trials precedents and OpenFDA_get_approval_history. Never estimate prevalence from memory — use OpenTargets, gnomAD, or COSMIC.

Core Principles

1. Report-First Approach (MANDATORY)

DO NOT show tool outputs to user. Instead:

  1. Create [INDICATION]_trial_feasibility_report.md FIRST
  2. Initialize with all section headers
  3. Progressively update as data arrives
  4. Present only the final report

2. Evidence Grading System

Grade Symbol Criteria Examples
A 3-star Regulatory acceptance, multiple precedents FDA-approved endpoint in same indication
B 2-star Clinical validation, single precedent Phase 3 trial in related indication
C 1-star Preclinical or exploratory Phase 1 use, biomarker validation ongoing
D 0-star Proposed, no validation Novel endpoint, no precedent

3. Feasibility Score (0-100)

Weighted composite score:

  • Patient Availability (30%): Population size x biomarker prevalence x geography
  • Endpoint Precedent (25%): Historical use, regulatory acceptance
  • Regulatory Clarity (20%): Pathway defined, precedents exist
  • Comparator Feasibility (15%): Standard of care availability
  • Safety Monitoring (10%): Known risks, monitoring established

Interpretation: >=75 HIGH (proceed), 50-74 MODERATE (additional validation), <50 LOW (de-risking required)


When to Use This Skill

Apply when users:

  • Plan early-phase trials (Phase 1/2 emphasis)
  • Need enrollment feasibility assessment
  • Design biomarker-selected trials
  • Evaluate endpoint strategies
  • Assess regulatory pathways
  • Compare trial design options
  • Need safety monitoring plans

Trigger phrases: "clinical trial design", "trial feasibility", "enrollment projections", "endpoint selection", "trial planning", "Phase 1/2 design", "basket trial", "biomarker trial"


Core Strategy: 6 Research Paths

Execute 6 parallel research dimensions. See STUDY_DESIGN_PROCEDURES.md for detailed steps per path.

Trial Design Query
|
+-- PATH 1: Patient Population Sizing
|   Disease prevalence, biomarker prevalence, geographic distribution,
|   eligibility criteria impact, enrollment projections
|
+-- PATH 2: Biomarker Prevalence & Testing
|   Mutation frequency, testing availability, turnaround time,
|   cost/reimbursement, alternative biomarkers
|
+-- PATH 3: Comparator Selection
|   Standard of care, approved comparators, historical controls,
|   placebo appropriateness, combination therapy
|
+-- PATH 4: Endpoint Selection
|   Primary endpoint precedents, FDA acceptance history,
|   measurement feasibility, surrogate vs clinical endpoints
|
+-- PATH 5: Safety Endpoints & Monitoring
|   Mechanism-based toxicity, class effects, organ-specific monitoring,
|   DLT history, safety monitoring plan
|
+-- PATH 6: Regulatory Pathway
    Regulatory precedents (505(b)(1), 505(b)(2)), breakthrough therapy,
    orphan drug, fast track, FDA guidance

Report Structure (14 Sections)

Create [INDICATION]_trial_feasibility_report.md with all 14 sections. See REPORT_TEMPLATE.md for full templates with fillable fields.

  1. Executive Summary - Feasibility score, key findings, go/no-go recommendation
  2. Disease Background - Prevalence, incidence, SOC, unmet need
  3. Patient Population Analysis - Base population, biomarker selection, eligibility funnel, enrollment projections
  4. Biomarker Strategy - Primary biomarker, alternatives, testing logistics
  5. Endpoint Selection & Justification - Primary/secondary/exploratory endpoints, statistical considerations
  6. Comparator Analysis - SOC, trial design options (single-arm vs randomized vs non-inferiority), drug sourcing
  7. Safety Endpoints & Monitoring Plan - DLT definition, mechanism-based toxicities, organ monitoring, SMC
  8. Study Design Recommendations - Phase, design type, schema, eligibility, treatment plan, assessment schedule
  9. Enrollment & Site Strategy - Site selection, enrollment projections, recruitment strategies
  10. Regulatory Pathway - FDA pathway, precedents, pre-IND meeting, IND timeline
  11. Budget & Resource Considerations - Cost drivers, timeline, FTE requirements
  12. Risk Assessment - Feasibility risks, scientific risks, mitigation strategies
  13. Success Criteria & Go/No-Go Decision - Phase 1/2 criteria, interim analysis, feasibility scorecard
  14. Recommendations & Next Steps - Final recommendation, critical path to IND, alternative designs

Tool Reference by Research Path

PATH 1: Patient Population Sizing

  • OpenTargets_get_disease_id_description_by_name - Disease lookup
  • OpenTargets_get_diseases_phenotypes_by_target_ensembl - Prevalence data
  • ClinVar_search_variants - Biomarker mutation frequency
  • gnomad_search_variants - Population allele frequencies
  • PubMed_search_articles - Epidemiology literature
  • search_clinical_trials - Enrollment feasibility from past trials

PATH 2: Biomarker Prevalence & Testing

  • ClinVar_get_variant_details - Variant pathogenicity
  • COSMIC_search_mutations - Cancer-specific mutation frequencies
  • gnomad_get_variant - Population genetics
  • PubMed_search_articles - CDx test performance, guidelines

PATH 3: Comparator Selection

  • drugbank_get_drug_basic_info_by_drug_name_or_id - Drug info
  • drugbank_get_indications_by_drug_name_or_drugbank_id - Approved indications
  • drugbank_get_pharmacology_by_drug_name_or_drugbank_id - Mechanism
  • FDA_OrangeBook_search_drug - Generic availability
  • OpenFDA_get_approval_history - Approval details
  • search_clinical_trials - Historical control data

PATH 4: Endpoint Selection

  • search_clinical_trials - Precedent trials, endpoints used
  • PubMed_search_articles - FDA acceptance history, endpoint validation
  • OpenFDA_get_approval_history - Approved endpoints by indication

PATH 5: Safety Endpoints & Monitoring

  • drugbank_get_pharmacology_by_drug_name_or_drugbank_id - Mechanism toxicity
  • FDA_get_warnings_and_cautions_by_drug_name - FDA black box warnings
  • FAERS_search_reports_by_drug_and_reaction - Real-world adverse events
  • FAERS_count_reactions_by_drug_event - AE frequency
  • FAERS_count_death_related_by_drug - Serious outcomes
  • PubMed_search_articles - DLT definitions, monitoring strategies

PATH 6: Regulatory Pathway

  • OpenFDA_get_approval_history - Precedent approvals
  • PubMed_search_articles - Breakthrough designations, FDA guidance
  • search_clinical_trials - Regulatory precedents (accelerated approval)

Quick Start Example

from tooluniverse import ToolUniverse

tu = ToolUniverse(use_cache=True)
tu.load_tools()

# Example: EGFR+ NSCLC trial feasibility
# Step 1: Disease prevalence
disease_info = tu.tools.OpenTargets_get_disease_id_description_by_name(
    diseaseName="non-small cell lung cancer"
)
prevalence = tu.tools.OpenTargets_get_diseases_phenotypes(
    efoId=disease_info['data']['id']
)

# Step 2: Biomarker prevalence
variants = tu.tools.ClinVar_search_variants(gene="EGFR", significance="pathogenic")

# Step 3: Precedent trials
trials = tu.tools.search_clinical_trials(
    condition="EGFR positive non-small cell lung cancer",
    status="completed", phase="2"
)

# Step 4: Standard of care comparator
soc = tu.tools.FDA_OrangeBook_search_drug(ingredient="osimertinib")

# Compile into feasibility report...

See WORKFLOW_DETAILS.md for the complete 6-path Python workflow and use case examples.


Integration with Other Skills

  • tooluniverse-drug-research: Investigate mechanism, preclinical data
  • tooluniverse-disease-research: Deep dive on disease biology
  • tooluniverse-target-research: Validate drug target, essentiality
  • tooluniverse-pharmacovigilance: Post-market safety for comparator drugs
  • tooluniverse-precision-oncology: Biomarker biology, resistance mechanisms

Programmatic Access (Beyond Tools)

When ToolUniverse tools return limited trial metadata, use the ClinicalTrials.gov v2 API directly:

import requests, pandas as pd

# Search with pagination (all lung cancer immunotherapy trials with results)
all_studies = []
token = None
while True:
    params = {"query.cond": "lung cancer", "query.intr": "immunotherapy",
              "filter.overallStatus": "COMPLETED", "filter.results": "WITH_RESULTS", "pageSize": 100}
    if token: params["pageToken"] = token
    resp = requests.get("https://clinicaltrials.gov/api/v2/studies", params=params).json()
    all_studies.extend(resp.get("studies", []))
    token = resp.get("nextPageToken")
    if not token: break

# Extract structured data
rows = []
for s in all_studies:
    proto = s.get("protocolSection", {})
    rows.append({
        "nctId": proto.get("identificationModule", {}).get("nctId"),
        "title": proto.get("identificationModule", {}).get("briefTitle"),
        "enrollment": proto.get("designModule", {}).get("enrollmentInfo", {}).get("count"),
        "phase": proto.get("designModule", {}).get("phases", [None])[0] if proto<
how to use tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design

How to use tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design on Cursor

AI-first code editor with Composer

1

Prerequisites

Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:

  • Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
  • Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with node --version)
  • Active project directory or workspace where you want to add tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design
2

Execute installation command

Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:

$npx skills add https://github.com/mims-harvard/tooluniverse --skill tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design

The skills CLI fetches tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design from GitHub repository mims-harvard/tooluniverse and configures it for Cursor.

3

Select Cursor when prompted

The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:

◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────
│ • Amp
│ • Antigravity
│ • Cline
│ • Codex
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ • Cursor
│ • Windsurf
4

Verify installation

Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:

.cursor/skills/tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design

Reload or restart Cursor to activate tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design) or your agent's skill management interface.

Security & Verification Notice

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 development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.

List & Monetize Your Skill

Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning

GET_STARTED →

Use Cases

Task Automation & Efficiency

Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort

Example

Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications

Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks

Knowledge Enhancement

Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance

Example

Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources

Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x

Quality Improvement

Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements

Example

Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors

Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort

Implementation Guide

Prerequisites

  • Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
  • Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
  • Willingness to iterate and refine outputs

Time Estimate

15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity

Installation Steps

  1. 1.Install skill using provided installation command
  2. 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
  3. 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
  4. 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
  5. 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable

Common Pitfalls

  • Expecting perfect results without iteration
  • Not providing enough context in prompts
  • Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
  • Accepting outputs without review and validation

Best Practices

✓ Do

  • +Start with clear, specific prompts
  • +Provide relevant context and constraints
  • +Review and refine all outputs before using
  • +Iterate to improve output quality
  • +Document successful prompt patterns

✗ Don't

  • Don't use without understanding skill limitations
  • Don't skip validation of outputs
  • Don't share sensitive information in prompts
  • Don't expect skill to replace human judgment

💡 Pro Tips

  • Be specific about desired format and style
  • Ask for multiple options to choose from
  • Request explanations to understand reasoning
  • Combine AI efficiency with human expertise

When to Use This

✓ Use When

Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.

✗ Avoid When

Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.

Learning Path

  1. 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
  2. 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
  3. 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
  4. 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation

Discussion

Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
  • No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviews

Ratings

4.760 reviews
  • Dhruvi Jain· Dec 28, 2024

    tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.

  • Amelia Bhatia· Dec 28, 2024

    We added tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.

  • Arjun Desai· Dec 20, 2024

    tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Jin Ndlovu· Dec 12, 2024

    tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.

  • Jin Johnson· Dec 12, 2024

    tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.

  • Oshnikdeep· Nov 19, 2024

    Keeps context tight: tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Daniel Jain· Nov 19, 2024

    Useful defaults in tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.

  • Jin Diallo· Nov 11, 2024

    I recommend tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

  • Noah Kim· Nov 7, 2024

    I recommend tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

  • Daniel Sethi· Nov 3, 2024

    Registry listing for tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.

showing 1-10 of 60

1 / 6