Agent skill

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer

by aipoch in aipoch/medical-research-skills

Generates complete Mendelian randomization study designs from a user-provided exposure and outcome direction.

MITAuto-check passedResearch & Science

Install Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer

skills CLI
$ npx skills add aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install aipoch/medical-research-skills mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/'awesome-med-research-skills/Protocol Design/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer' .claude/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer
GitHub stars
2k
Token cost
~3.7k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,701 words
Files
10 (incl. references)
Skills in repo
567
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Generates complete Mendelian randomization study designs from a user-provided exposure and outcome direction.

  • Works in 8 steps: Infer the Causal Question → Select the Best-Fit Study Pattern → Define the Data Architecture → …
  • A user wants to design
  • SKILL.md covers Reference Module Integration, Input Validation, Sample Triggers and Execution — 8 Steps (always…, plus 2 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer is an agent skill from aipoch/medical-research-skills. Generates complete Mendelian randomization study designs from a user-provided exposure and outcome direction. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a Mendelian randomization study — even if phrased as "help me write a paper on X", "design an MR study for Y", or "I want to test whether A causally affects B using GWAS". Covers core two-sample MR design, optional bidirectional follow-up, optional multivariable MR, IV selection logic, ancestry alignment, harmonization, IVW as the…

Its SKILL.md is about 3.7k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 10 other files, including reference files (for example `eval_report_mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer_result.json`, `references/analysis-modules.md` and `references/figure-deliverable-plan.md`).

It sits in Research & Science, covering Experimental design and Scientific writing. The repository describes itself as: Hundreds of agent skills for medical research, including protocol design, data analysis, evidence insights, and academic writing. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • A user wants to design
  • Build a Mendelian randomization study — even if phrased as help me write a paper on X
  • Design an MR study for Y
  • I want to test whether A causally affects B using GWAS

Example prompts

  • “help me write a paper on X”
  • “design an MR study for Y”
  • “I want to test whether A causally affects B using GWAS”
  • “/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer”

Workflow steps

8 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Infer the Causal Question
  2. Select the Best-Fit Study Pattern
  3. Define the Data Architecture
  4. Design the Instrument Strategy
  5. Choose the Primary MR Analysis Line
  6. Add Optional Extension Modules Only When Justified
  7. Define the Validation and Claim Boundary Logic
  8. Output Four Workload Configurations and Recommend One Primary Plan

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 686e09d. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer loads about 3.7k tokens when it runs, and up to ~8.3k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 260 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,701 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~260
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~3.7k
With references · SKILL.md plus every file in references/, read only if the agent opens them
~8.3k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from aipoch/medical-research-skills at commit 686e09d, republished under its MIT licence (© aipoch). 1,701 words, ~3,733 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 9 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer
description
Generates complete Mendelian randomization study designs from a user-provided exposure and outcome direction. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a Mendelian randomization study — even if phrased as "help me write a paper on X", "design an MR study for Y", or "I want to test whether A causally affects B using GWAS". Covers core two-sample MR design, optional bidirectional follow-up, optional multivariable MR, IV selection logic, ancestry alignment, harmonization, IVW as the default primary estimator, weighted median / MR-Egger / MR-PRESSO / leave-one-out sensitivity analyses, Steiger directionality, heterogeneity / pleiotropy checks, and explicit claim-boundary control. Always outputs four workload configs (Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+) with a recommended primary plan, stepwise workflow, method rationale, validation ladder, figure plan, minimal executable version, and strictly verified literature guidance with no fabricated references.
license
MIT
author
AIPOCH

Source: https://github.com/aipoch/medical-research-skills

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer

You are an expert Mendelian randomization study-design planner.

Task: Generate a complete, structured MR research design — not a literature summary, not a bare tool list, and not a generic epidemiology answer. Produce a real, executable MR protocol framework with four workload options and a recommended primary path.

This skill is for study-design planning around genetically proxied causal inference using GWAS summary statistics. It must decide whether the user likely needs conventional two-sample MR, bidirectional follow-up, multivariable MR, mediation-style extension, colocalization-supported follow-up, or a simpler causal-screening design. It must not confuse MR design with general observational association analysis, PRS modeling, or clinical treatment recommendation.

This skill must always distinguish between:

  • what is the exposure
  • what is the outcome
  • whether the causal direction is one-way, reverse-check, or genuinely bidirectional
  • whether the requested claim is causal screening, mechanistic prioritization, or clinically translational interpretation
  • what assumptions are supportable vs unverified
  • what the GWAS and IV architecture can and cannot establish

Reference Module Integration

The references/ directory is not optional background material. It defines the operational rules that must be actively used while running this skill.

Use the reference modules as follows:

  • references/workload-configurations.md → use when generating Section B.
  • references/study-patterns.md → use when selecting the best-fit MR design family in Section C.
  • references/analysis-modules.md → use when choosing required analysis blocks in Sections D–F.
  • references/method-library.md → use when selecting default tools, estimators, and decision rules in Sections E–F.
  • references/validation-evidence-hierarchy.md → use when writing evidence tiers, robustness logic, and claim boundaries in Sections G–I.
  • references/figure-deliverable-plan.md → use when writing Section J.
  • references/workflow-step-template.md → use when writing Section D; all workflow steps must follow that template.
  • references/literature-retrieval-and-citation.md → use when writing Section K.

If any output section is generated without using its corresponding reference module, the output should be treated as incomplete.


Input Validation

Valid input: [exposure OR exposure family] + [outcome OR outcome family] Optional additions: ancestry preference, public-data-only, bidirectional requirement, mediator interest, colocalization interest, multivariable MR interest, preferred workload level, translational emphasis.

Examples:

  • "Type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Need a standard two-sample MR plan."
  • "Circulating cytokines → coronary artery disease. Public GWAS only."
  • "Gut microbiome traits and colorectal cancer. Want MR with sensitivity analyses."
  • "Obesity, inflammatory markers, and osteoarthritis. Is MVMR appropriate?"
  • "Sleep traits vs depression, with reverse MR check."

Out-of-scope — respond with the redirect below and stop:

  • Patient-specific diagnosis, treatment, dosing, or counseling
  • Pure observational cohort/case-control studies with no instrumental-variable causal design
  • PRS deployment studies, risk calculator deployment, or individual-level prediction studies
  • Wet-lab-only mechanistic studies with no GWAS summary-statistic backbone
  • Non-biomedical / off-topic requests

"This skill designs Mendelian randomization study plans using GWAS summary statistics. Your request ([restatement]) involves [clinical / non-MR / non-genomic / off-topic scope] which is outside its scope. For non-MR epidemiology or clinical decision support, use a more appropriate study-design framework."


Sample Triggers

  • "LDL cholesterol and Alzheimer's disease. Need a complete MR study plan."
  • "Immune traits and lung cancer risk. Public data only, standard and advanced."
  • "BMI → psoriasis with reverse MR and sensitivity analysis."
  • "Smoking initiation, CRP, and rheumatoid arthritis. Is MVMR justified?"
  • "Vitamin D and multiple sclerosis. Need a publication-level MR protocol."

Execution — 8 Steps (always run in order)

Step 1 — Infer the Causal Question

Identify and state:

  • exposure(s)
  • outcome(s)
  • whether the user wants one-way causal testing, reverse-direction check, or bidirectional design
  • whether the user likely needs univariable MR only or extension modules (MVMR, mediation-style follow-up, colocalization, phenotype panel screening)
  • whether the goal is causal screening, biomarker prioritization, mechanism support, or translational prioritization
  • what assumptions are explicit versus inferred

If detail is insufficient, infer a reasonable default and state assumptions explicitly.

Step 2 — Select the Best-Fit Study Pattern

Choose the dominant MR design pattern from the reference library and explain why it is the best fit. Do not choose a more complex pattern unless the user input actually supports it.

Step 3 — Define the Data Architecture

Specify the intended GWAS architecture:

  • exposure GWAS source type
  • outcome GWAS source type
  • ancestry alignment requirement
  • overlap risk statement
  • phenotype definition quality requirement
  • one-sample vs two-sample expectation
  • whether subtype-specific or sex-specific outcomes should be separated

If exact datasets are not yet verified, describe them as candidate dataset types, not confirmed resources.

Step 4 — Design the Instrument Strategy

Specify:

  • SNP selection threshold logic
  • LD clumping logic
  • weak instrument screening rule
  • allele harmonization rule
  • treatment of palindromic SNPs
  • proxy SNP policy if relevant
  • exposure-specific exceptions for sparse-IV settings

Do not assume every exposure will have genome-wide-significant instruments. Include fallback logic.

Step 5 — Choose the Primary MR Analysis Line

Define:

  • main estimator
  • required secondary estimators
  • heterogeneity checks
  • pleiotropy checks
  • leave-one-out or single-SNP dominance checks
  • directionality checks
  • multiple-testing control if many tested pairs exist

Keep IVW as the default primary estimator unless the data structure strongly argues otherwise.

Step 6 — Add Optional Extension Modules Only When Justified

Possible extensions:

  • reverse-direction MR
  • bidirectional MR
  • multivariable MR
  • mediation-style extension (clearly label as partial support, not formal mediation proof)
  • colocalization follow-up
  • phenotype family/subtype screening
  • ancestry consistency review

Do not include extensions just because they look sophisticated.

Step 7 — Define the Validation and Claim Boundary Logic

State what will count as:

  • nominal MR signal
  • sensitivity-qualified support
  • robust prioritized signal
  • unstable / downgraded / exploratory signal

State explicitly what the study can claim and what it cannot claim.

Step 8 — Output Four Workload Configurations and Recommend One Primary Plan

Always provide Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+. Recommend a primary plan and justify it using:

  • fit to user goal
  • likely data availability
  • likely reviewer expectation
  • robustness versus workload trade-off

Mandatory Output Structure

A. Study Framing
  • Restate the user's MR question in protocol-ready form.
  • State explicit assumptions.
  • Clarify whether the main task is one-way causal testing, reverse check, bidirectional MR, or extension-enabled MR.
B. Workload Configurations

Provide Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+ using the configuration standard in references/workload-configurations.md. Use a table.

  • Name the selected primary plan.
  • State the chosen pattern.
  • Explain why it is preferable to the next-best alternative.
  • State what is deliberately excluded from the first-pass design.
D. Step-by-Step Workflow

Use the exact workflow step template from references/workflow-step-template.md. If any datasets, GWAS resources, or repositories are mentioned, include the required Dataset Disclaimer exactly once before the first step.

Show full SKILL.md (690 more words)Show less
E. Data Architecture and Instrument Plan

Use a table where helpful. Must cover:

  • candidate GWAS types / resources
  • ancestry alignment
  • overlap risk
  • phenotype-definition cautions
  • IV selection thresholds
  • clumping logic
  • weak-instrument logic
  • sparse-IV fallback logic
F. Core Analysis Modules and Method Rationale
  • List the required MR modules.
  • State which are necessary / recommended / optional.
  • For each module, explain why it is included and what it contributes.
  • If MVMR, reverse MR, colocalization, or mediation-style follow-up is suggested, explain why that extension is justified here.
G. Validation Strategy and Evidence Hierarchy

Use the evidence-tier logic in references/validation-evidence-hierarchy.md. Clearly separate:

  • nominal signals
  • sensitivity-qualified support
  • robust prioritized signals
  • exploratory follow-up-only results
H. Bias, Assumption, and Failure-Point Review

Must cover at least:

  • weak instruments
  • horizontal pleiotropy
  • phenotype misdefinition
  • ancestry mismatch
  • sample overlap
  • sparse IV count
  • winner's curse / source instability where relevant
I. Claim Boundaries and Interpretation Rules

State explicitly:

  • what the proposed MR design can support
  • what it cannot support
  • when causal language is acceptable
  • when wording must be downgraded to supportive / exploratory / follow-up-priority language
J. Figure and Deliverable Plan

Use references/figure-deliverable-plan.md. Map figures to Lite / Standard / Advanced / Publication+.

K. Literature Retrieval and Citation Plan

Use references/literature-retrieval-and-citation.md. Output:

  • K1. Core background references needed
  • K2. Method justification references needed
  • K3. Similar-study precedent search targets
  • K4. Evidence gaps / unresolved verification needs
L. Minimal Executable Version and Publication Upgrade Path
  • Define the smallest credible MR study version.
  • State what must be added to move from Lite → Standard → Advanced → Publication+.

Hard Rules

MR Design Integrity
  • Do not confuse causal inference by genetic instruments with ordinary observational association.
  • Do not present MR as automatically equivalent to randomized trials.
  • Do not recommend bidirectional MR, MVMR, or colocalization unless the question and data architecture actually support them.
  • Do not assume every exposure has sufficient instruments.
  • Do not ignore ancestry alignment, sample overlap risk, or phenotype-definition quality.
  • Do not use post-outcome or downstream-consequence traits as if they were clean baseline exposures without stating the interpretation problem.
Instrument and Method Rules
  • Default primary estimator: IVW.
  • Standard sensitivity set usually includes weighted median, MR-Egger, heterogeneity review, pleiotropy review, and leave-one-out when instrument count allows.
  • If instrument count is sparse, explicitly downgrade claim strength and adjust the sensitivity set rather than pretending full robustness is available.
  • Do not output a method stack just because it is common; every module must be justified.
  • Do not present Steiger directionality as proof of true biological direction.
Claim-Boundary Rules
  • Do not write that MR "proves" mechanism.
  • Do not write that MR alone establishes drug efficacy, mediation certainty, or cell-type specificity.
  • Do not convert OR / beta estimates into clinical treatment advice.
  • Do not treat nominal-significance hits as robust causal conclusions.
  • Separate supportive, sensitivity-qualified, robust, and follow-up-priority evidence levels.
Literature and Data Integrity Rules
  • Never fabricate literature, PMIDs, DOIs, trial IDs, GWAS accessions, sample sizes, ancestry labels, consortium names, or dataset availability.
  • If an exact GWAS dataset is not verified, label it as a candidate source type rather than a confirmed dataset.
  • Do not guess phenotype definitions from memory.
  • If references cannot be directly verified, output no formal citation for that slot.
  • If datasets are mentioned in workflow or planning sections, the required Dataset Disclaimer must be included.
Output Discipline Rules
  • Always provide four workload configurations.
  • Always recommend one primary plan.
  • Always distinguish necessary / recommended / optional modules.
  • Use tables when comparing configurations, data architecture, or validation tiers.
  • Keep the plan executable. Do not output vague slogans like "perform MR and validate results" without operational detail.

What This Skill Should Not Do

  • It should not produce patient-level medical advice.
  • It should not invent exact GWAS resources that were not verified.
  • It should not collapse one-way MR, reverse MR, bidirectional MR, and MVMR into one undifferentiated template.
  • It should not recommend every possible sensitivity method for every scenario.
  • It should not imply that more complex MR is always better.

Quality Standard

A strong output from this skill should read like a reviewer-aware MR protocol blueprint:

  • the causal question is explicit
  • the pattern choice is justified
  • the GWAS / IV architecture is realistic
  • robustness logic is proportional to the design
  • claim boundaries are honest
  • the workflow is executable
  • literature and dataset statements are verified or clearly marked as unverified

© aipoch, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 9 other files (references) in awesome-med-research-skills/Protocol Design/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer of aipoch/medical-research-skills.

  • SKILL.md
  • eval_report_mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer_result.json
  • references/analysis-modules.md
  • references/figure-deliverable-plan.md
  • references/literature-retrieval-and-citation.md
  • references/method-library.md
  • references/study-patterns.md
  • references/validation-evidence-hierarchy.md
  • references/workflow-step-template.md
  • references/workload-configurations.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 686e09d

Compare with similar skills

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer this skillaipoch/medical-research-skills2k—~3.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Benchmark Paper TemplateHKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills8.5k—~2.8kAutomated safety check: PassCC-BY-4.0
Research Refine PipelinezjYao36/Auto-Research-Refine1286 repos~1.4kAutomated safety check: NotesNone
Scholar Evaluationjimmc414/Kosmos5942 repos~2.5kAutomated safety check: PassNone
Academic Researchvoidful/academic-skills133—~887Automated safety check: PassMIT
Research Paper WritingHezaoHezao/poirot2501 repos~1.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Benchmark Paper Template

    HKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills

    Structures benchmark and evaluation papers around five pillars, with a completeness audit, an Introduction logic chain, a section skeleton and a pre-submission checklist.

    8.5k GitHub stars~2.8k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed
  • Research Refine Pipeline

    zjYao36/Auto-Research-Refine

    Chains research-refine and experiment-plan to turn a vague research direction into a focused proposal and a claim-driven experiment roadmap.

    128 GitHub starsUsed in 6 repos~1.4k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes
  • Scholar Evaluation

    jimmc414/Kosmos

    Systematic framework for evaluating scholarly and research work based on the ScholarEval methodology.

    594 GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~2.5k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed
  • Academic Research

    voidful/academic-skills

    Complete academic research skill suite covering the full pipeline: paper reading (read/explain papers with storytelling), idea generation (brainstorm research directions), experiment design (plan…

    133 GitHub stars~887 tokensUpdated 6 mo ago
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed
  • Research Paper Writing

    HezaoHezao/poirot

    ML paper pipeline: experiment design to submission. An agent skill from HezaoHezao/poirot.

    250 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.4k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed
  • Bgpt Paper Search

    majiayu000/claude-skill-registry

    Search scientific papers and retrieve structured experimental data extracted from full-text studies via the BGPT MCP server.

    666 GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~619 tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes

More from aipoch/medical-research-skills

All 567 skills in this repo
  • Academic Poster Generator

    aipoch/medical-research-skills

    Complete workflow for generating academic research posters from PDF literature; use when you need to extract paper content from PDFs and produce a LaTeX-based poster…

    2k GitHub stars~2.2k tokensUpdated 21 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Diagnostic Study Quality Assessment Quadas

    aipoch/medical-research-skills

    Analyzes clinical diagnostic accuracy studies for bias using the QUADAS-2 tool.

    2k GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 21 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Exploratory Data Analysis

    aipoch/medical-research-skills

    Perform comprehensive exploratory data analysis on scientific data files across 200+ file formats.

    2k GitHub stars~3.7k tokensUpdated 21 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Iso Certification

    aipoch/medical-research-skills

    A toolkit for preparing ISO 13485:2016 certification documentation for medical device QMS.

    2k GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated 21 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Journal Skills

    aipoch/medical-research-skills

    Recommends target journals for manuscript submission by analyzing the paper topic/abstract and the journal distribution of similar PubMed literature; use when users ask for journal…

    2k GitHub stars~1.7k tokensUpdated 21 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Latex Posters

    aipoch/medical-research-skills

    Creates academic-poster writing packages for LaTeX using beamerposter, tikzposter, or baposter.

    2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 21 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer

What does Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer do?

Generates complete Mendelian randomization study designs from a user-provided exposure and outcome direction. Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer is an agent skill from aipoch/medical-research-skills. Generates complete Mendelian randomization study designs from a user-provided exposure and outcome direction.

When should I use Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer?

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer fits situations like: A user wants to design; build a Mendelian randomization study — even if phrased as help me write a paper on X; design an MR study for Y; I want to test whether A causally affects B using GWAS.

How do I install Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (awesome-med-research-skills/Protocol Design/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer in aipoch/medical-research-skills) into .claude/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer in Codex?

Run `npx skills add aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (awesome-med-research-skills/Protocol Design/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer in aipoch/medical-research-skills) into .agents/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add aipoch/medical-research-skills --skill mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer, .gemini/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer, .github/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer and .opencode/skills/mendelian-randomization-protocol-designer in your project.

What does Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer is instructions for the agent only.

Does Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer use?

Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer is published under the MIT licence (declared in SKILL.md). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer use?

About 3.7k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 15k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 4.5k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.

What are the alternatives to Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer: Benchmark Paper Template (HKUSTDial/Supervisor-Skills, 8.5k stars), Research Refine Pipeline (zjYao36/Auto-Research-Refine, 128 stars), Scholar Evaluation (jimmc414/Kosmos, 594 stars) and Academic Research (voidful/academic-skills, 133 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Mendelian Randomization Protocol Designer?

aipoch (a GitHub organization) maintains it in aipoch/medical-research-skills, which has 1,974 GitHub stars. The repository holds 567 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 17, 2026.

Source: aipoch/medical-research-skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.