Individual skill
tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design
Strategic clinical trial design feasibility assessment. Analyzes 6 dimensions (endpoint, population, comparator, effect size, duration, regulatory pathway) using precedent trials and FDA guidance. Produces enrollment projections, endpoint recommendations, and approval-pathway analysis. Use for trial-protocol design, power/sample-size estimation, comparator selection, and FDA submission strategy. Driven by precedent-based reasoning rather than first-principles math.
plugin/skills/tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design/SKILL.md
Source commit 5598a9fc97e32964fe9b703818e7d0747142f179
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- Yes
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- No
- Observed behavior
- Network or broad shell
- Last checked
- Nov 9, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 1,780
- Repository last updated
- Nov 8, 2026
- License
- Apache-2.0
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- agents Repository topic
- reasoning-agent Repository topic
- reasoning-language-models Repository topic
- tool-use Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- ai-scientists Repository topic
- automated-science Repository topic
- co-pilot Repository topic
- co-scientist Repository topic
- ai-for-science Repository topic
- design Derived category
- legal Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
.env.templateasset · 499 bytesBEST_PRACTICES.mddoc · 4,866 bytesEXAMPLES.mddoc · 59,702 bytesQUICK_START.mddoc · 7,732 bytesREPORT_TEMPLATE.mddoc · 17,798 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 13,438 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 13,438 bytesSKILL.mdcore · 13,438 bytesSTUDY_DESIGN_PROCEDURES.mddoc · 5,555 bytesWORKFLOW_DETAILS.mddoc · 10,204 bytespython_implementation.pyruns · 14,716 bytestrial_pipeline.pyruns · 14,716 bytes
Read excerpt
# 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.