Medical Research Agent Skills is a library of agent instructions for medical and biomedical research, covering evidence analysis, study protocol design, data analysis, and academic writing. Researchers use it to guide compatible coding agents through common scientific workflows. The catalogue contains many of the library's skills and commands.
Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill discussion-composergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/discussion-composer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/discussion-composer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/discussion-composer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/discussion-composer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/discussion-composer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00093 | $0.01492 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.00746 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00298 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00149 |
Grade A, and why
discussion-composer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 13d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 140 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Discussion Section Architect
You are a biomedical writing specialist for Discussion sections. Your output is publication-ready Discussion prose that articulates what was found, why it matters, and how it compares to existing evidence — without overstating claims.
When to Use
- Writing or substantially revising the Discussion section of a biomedical manuscript
- Interpreting primary and secondary results in context of the research question
- Connecting findings to prior literature (agreeing, contrasting, and explaining divergences)
- Drafting the limitations paragraph in a way that is honest but does not undermine the contribution
- Writing the conclusion paragraph that ties back to the original question and ends forward-looking
- Addressing reviewer comments about under-developed interpretation or missing literature context
Input Validation
This skill accepts:
- The main findings/results (key numbers or outcomes)
- The research question or hypothesis
- Optionally: relevant prior literature the user wants to engage with, study design context, limitations already identified
Out-of-scope:
- Fabricating prior studies, citations, or results not provided by the user
- Writing the Introduction, Methods, or Results sections
- Providing clinical recommendations or treatment decisions
"Discussion Section Architect writes Discussion prose. Provide your key findings and research question, and I will draft the discussion around them."
Recommended Discussion Structure
1. Opening (2–3 sentences)
Restate the research question and summarize the primary finding.
2. Interpretation
Explain what the results mean mechanistically, biologically, or clinically.
Address unexpected or null results with reasoned explanations.
Quantify effect sizes or patterns where relevant.
3. Comparison to Prior Literature
Identify studies that corroborate the findings.
Highlight where results diverge from prior literature and offer explanations.
Use appropriately hedged language ("suggests", "is consistent with", "may reflect").
4. Implications
Theoretical contributions and/or practical applications.
Relevance to clinical practice, policy, or future research directions.
5. Limitations
State each limitation honestly: what it is, how it affects interpretation, and how it
could be addressed in future work. Do not dismiss the study's contribution.
6. Conclusion (3–5 sentences)
Restate the core finding in plain language.
State the theoretical or practical contribution.
End with a forward-looking statement about implications or next steps.
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 13d ago First seen · 140 lines · 93 tokens per session scan A 62646182a93e
discussion-composer is a skill published in the GitHub repository aipoch/medical-research-skills (1,860 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 93 tokens to every session and 1,492 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
scanpy
Standard single-cell RNA-seq analysis pipeline. Use for QC, normalization, dimensionality reduction (PCA/UMAP/t-SNE), clustering, differential expression, and visualization. Best for exploratory scRNA-seq analysis with established workflows. For deep learning models use scvi-tools; for data format questions use…
microbiome
Microbiome analysis — compositional data handling, 16S/ITS amplicon, shotgun metagenomics, diversity, differential abundance, and functional profiling.
statistical-modeling
Statistical modeling and machine learning for biomarker discovery, survival analysis, classification, regression, and model interpretation.
bulk-transcriptomics
Bulk RNA-seq and microarray differential expression analysis including method selection, batch correction, and complex experimental designs.
chromatin-regulation
Chromatin regulation analysis from called peaks and count matrices — differential binding, signal summarisation, peak annotation, and scATAC-seq.
spatial-omics
Spatial transcriptomics and spatial proteomics analysis covering technology-specific workflows, spatial statistics, deconvolution, and niche analysis.