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.
Systematically assess clinical trial feasibility by analyzing 6 research dimensions. Produces comprehensive feasibility reports with quantitative enrollment projections, endpoint recommendations, and regulatory pathway analysis.
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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:
- Create
[INDICATION]_trial_feasibility_report.mdFIRST - Initialize with all section headers
- Progressively update as data arrives
- 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.
- Executive Summary - Feasibility score, key findings, go/no-go recommendation
- Disease Background - Prevalence, incidence, SOC, unmet need
- Patient Population Analysis - Base population, biomarker selection, eligibility funnel, enrollment projections
- Biomarker Strategy - Primary biomarker, alternatives, testing logistics
- Endpoint Selection & Justification - Primary/secondary/exploratory endpoints, statistical considerations
- Comparator Analysis - SOC, trial design options (single-arm vs randomized vs non-inferiority), drug sourcing
- Safety Endpoints & Monitoring Plan - DLT definition, mechanism-based toxicities, organ monitoring, SMC
- Study Design Recommendations - Phase, design type, schema, eligibility, treatment plan, assessment schedule
- Enrollment & Site Strategy - Site selection, enrollment projections, recruitment strategies
- Regulatory Pathway - FDA pathway, precedents, pre-IND meeting, IND timeline
- Budget & Resource Considerations - Cost drivers, timeline, FTE requirements
- Risk Assessment - Feasibility risks, scientific risks, mitigation strategies
- Success Criteria & Go/No-Go Decision - Phase 1/2 criteria, interim analysis, feasibility scorecard
- 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 lookupOpenTargets_get_diseases_phenotypes_by_target_ensembl- Prevalence dataClinVar_search_variants- Biomarker mutation frequencygnomad_search_variants- Population allele frequenciesPubMed_search_articles- Epidemiology literaturesearch_clinical_trials- Enrollment feasibility from past trials
PATH 2: Biomarker Prevalence & Testing
ClinVar_get_variant_details- Variant pathogenicityCOSMIC_search_mutations- Cancer-specific mutation frequenciesgnomad_get_variant- Population geneticsPubMed_search_articles- CDx test performance, guidelines
PATH 3: Comparator Selection
drugbank_get_drug_basic_info_by_drug_name_or_id- Drug infodrugbank_get_indications_by_drug_name_or_drugbank_id- Approved indicationsdrugbank_get_pharmacology_by_drug_name_or_drugbank_id- MechanismFDA_OrangeBook_search_drug- Generic availabilityOpenFDA_get_approval_history- Approval detailssearch_clinical_trials- Historical control data
PATH 4: Endpoint Selection
search_clinical_trials- Precedent trials, endpoints usedPubMed_search_articles- FDA acceptance history, endpoint validationOpenFDA_get_approval_history- Approved endpoints by indication
PATH 5: Safety Endpoints & Monitoring
drugbank_get_pharmacology_by_drug_name_or_drugbank_id- Mechanism toxicityFDA_get_warnings_and_cautions_by_drug_name- FDA black box warningsFAERS_search_reports_by_drug_and_reaction- Real-world adverse eventsFAERS_count_reactions_by_drug_event- AE frequencyFAERS_count_death_related_by_drug- Serious outcomesPubMed_search_articles- DLT definitions, monitoring strategies
PATH 6: Regulatory Pathway
OpenFDA_get_approval_history- Precedent approvalsPubMed_search_articles- Breakthrough designations, FDA guidancesearch_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 on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
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
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches tooluniverse-clinical-trial-design from GitHub repository mims-harvard/tooluniverse and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
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
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.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 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▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.7★★★★★60 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