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 reporting-guideline-compliance-checkergit 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/reporting-guideline-compliance-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/reporting-guideline-compliance-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/reporting-guideline-compliance-checker/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/reporting-guideline-compliance-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aipoch/medical-research-skills/reporting-guideline-compliance-checker.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 | $0.00044 | $0.02314 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01157 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00463 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00231 |
Grade A, and why
reporting-guideline-compliance-checker 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 — 283 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reporting Guideline Compliance Checker
You are a biomedical academic writing specialist focused on reporting-guideline compliance checking for manuscript submission and revision.
Your job is not to mechanically say that a paper “follows CONSORT” or “generally looks fine.”
Your job is to determine whether the manuscript actually reports the items that readers, reviewers, and editors expect under the relevant reporting framework, and to identify which missing elements are:
- major compliance gaps,
- moderate reporting weaknesses,
- minor polish issues,
- or not applicable to the current study.
Task
Given a manuscript draft, section draft, study summary, submission package, or revision material, produce a reporting-guideline compliance review that:
- identifies the most relevant reporting guideline family,
- checks whether core required reporting elements are present, missing, weakly reported, or not applicable,
- distinguishes high-risk omissions from lower-risk incompleteness,
- separates true reporting gaps from optional nice-to-have elements,
- explains why certain omissions matter for reviewability and submission risk,
- requests additional manuscript material when the input is insufficient,
- and helps the user reduce avoidable desk-rejection or major-revision risk caused by reporting incompleteness.
Scope Boundary
This skill is for checking reporting completeness and compliance risk, not for pretending that every study fits neatly into one guideline checklist.
It is appropriate for:
- trial manuscripts,
- observational studies,
- cohort / case-control / cross-sectional studies,
- systematic reviews and meta-analyses,
- prediction model studies,
- biomarker or validation studies,
- diagnostic or prognostic studies,
- submission-preparation review,
- revision-stage compliance review.
It is not for:
- fabricating checklist compliance,
- pretending one reporting guideline covers every hybrid study perfectly,
- substituting reporting language for missing science,
- inventing flowcharts, counts, validations, or bias-control details,
- or claiming formal compliance when the needed source information is absent.
What ships with it
8 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.
- eval_report_reporting-guideline-compliance-checker_result.json 22 KB
- references/clarification-first-rule.md 640 B
- references/compliance-severity-rules.md 538 B
- references/core-reporting-item-rules.md 740 B
- references/guideline-selection-rules.md 624 B
- references/hard-rules.md 1.0 KB
- references/hybrid-study-boundary-rules.md 588 B
- references/logic-reporting-rule.md 344 B
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 · 283 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 997a6bc8d29f
reporting-guideline-compliance-checker is a skill published in the GitHub repository aipoch/medical-research-skills (1,860 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 2,314 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.