map-agency-question-evidence

Solid

Triages a received health-authority information request into atomic answerable units and maps each unit to its source evidence, its gaps, and a proposed owner, with completeness reported as a fraction against both the request itself and the standard clinical pharmacology question battery. Use this skill when someone asks to break down, triage, map, track or check coverage of an agency question, information request, list of questions, request for supplementary information or meeting-minute action — for example "split this IR into answerable parts and tell me what evidence we already have" or "check our draft response cites something that actually resolves". Do not use for preparing a briefing package we choose to send, for authoring the scientific answer to a question, for deciding which of two conflicting values is correct, or for predicting what an authority will ask next.

AI & Automation 6 stars 0 forks Updated 6 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 84/100

Stars 20%
28
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Agency Question Evidence Map Take an information request that has already arrived from a health authority, break it into units that can each be answered and evidenced on their own, and map every unit to the document, version and locator that answers it — or record that nothing does. Produce a decomposition register, an evidence map, a gap and owner register, and a completeness memo stating coverage as a fraction, for a qualified clinical pharmacologist and the accountable regulatory owner to work from. **This skill structures and traces. It never writes the scientific answer, never decides which of two conflicting values is correct, and never makes or implies a commitment to the authority.** ## Who this is for Clinical pharmacology leads assembling a response to an agency question · regulatory affairs coordinators tracking which questions have evidence and which have owners · reviewers checking a drafted response before it enters the approval chain. ## When to use this skill Use when a request has **already been received** and the immediate problem is working out what it is actually asking and what evidence already exists: - "Split this information request into answerable parts and tell me what evidence we already have for each" - "Question 4 has three asks buried in one sentence — separate them" - "Which of these questions have no source we can cite yet, and who owns them?" - "Check the draft response: does every claim carry a citation that resolves?" - "We answer...

Details

Author
malekokour
Repository
malekokour/clinpharm-pmx-skills
Created
1 weeks ago
Last Updated
6 days ago
Language
Python
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

Code & Development Solid

prepare-dose-justification-evidence

Assembles and organises the evidence behind a registration or dose-optimisation dose justification — exposure-response integration, intrinsic and extrinsic factor coverage, formulation-bridging logic, dose-modification rules — arranged against the questions clinical pharmacology reviewers ask, with every claim carrying a locator and every gap named. Use this skill when someone asks to assemble, index, organise or gap-check the evidence supporting a proposed dose or regimen — for example "pull together what supports the 200 mg dose", "map our dose-modification rules to their evidence", or "which intrinsic factors are uncovered before we file". Do not use for first-in-human starting-dose review, for assessing a development plan for study gaps, or for any request to select, recommend, adjust or justify a dose — that decision belongs to a qualified human and this skill never makes it.

6 Updated 6 days ago
malekokour
Code & Development Listed

project-assessment-evidence

WHAT - Interactive evidence intake for project assessments. Ask the user where each evidence source lives, build an evidence map, track missing evidence, assumptions, freshness, and confidence before any scoring happens.

7 Updated yesterday
ulises-jeremias
AI & Automation Listed

evidence-assessment

Evaluating the quality, provenance, and relevance of evidence that supports or undermines a claim. Covers source credibility, sampling quality, study design, levels of evidence (anecdote to meta-analysis), base rate integration, distinguishing primary from secondary sources, and calibrating belief to evidence strength. Use when the question is not whether an argument is valid but whether its premises are actually supported by the available data.

69 Updated 1 months ago
Tibsfox