Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Conduct scoping conversation with user to define research question, key findings, and constraints. Generates scope.md that guides all subsequent steps. Second step of biomedical-science-writer workflow. Requires inventory.md to exist.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name scoping
description Conduct scoping conversation with user to define research question, key findings, and constraints. Generates scope.md that guides all subsequent steps. Second step of biomedical-science-writer workflow. Requires inventory.md to exist.

Scoping

Conducts a focused conversation to establish the research scope, then generates a scope document that guides all subsequent writing.

Prerequisites

  • inventory.md must exist (from context-ingestion step)
  • notes/irb-summary.md may exist (if IRB document was provided)
  • Review inventory before starting conversation

Workflow

[Read inventory.md and notes/irb-summary.md]
     │
     ▼
[Ask: Research Question]
     │
     ▼
[Ask: Key Findings] ─── Cross-reference with data inventory
     │
     ▼
[Confirm: Constraints] ─── From config.md
     │
     ▼
[Ask: Additional Context]
     │
     ▼
[IRB Scope Comparison] ─── If IRB exists, compare and confirm discrepancies
     │
     ▼
[Generate scope.md and notes/irb-scope-comparison.md]

Step 1: Review Inventory and IRB

Before asking questions, read inventory.md to understand:

  • How many papers are available for literature context
  • What data files exist (this informs what results are possible)
  • What figures are already generated
  • Whether code repository is available

Also check if notes/irb-summary.md exists. If it does, read it to understand:

  • IRB-approved population and inclusion/exclusion criteria
  • Approved procedures and endpoints
  • Sample size justification
  • Study design

This context helps ask informed questions and validate user responses. Note that IRB scope is often broader than actual research scope.

Step 2: Scoping Conversation

Ask questions one at a time. Wait for response before proceeding.

Question 1: Research Question

"What research question does this study address?

Try to frame it as a specific, answerable question. For example:

  • 'Can MR fingerprinting differentiate tumor recurrence from treatment effect?'
  • 'Does quantitative T1 mapping predict treatment response in glioblastoma?'"

Good research questions have:

  • Specific population/context
  • Clear intervention or exposure
  • Measurable outcome

If vague, ask follow-up to clarify.

Question 2: Key Findings

"What are the key findings from your analysis?

I can see from your data that you have [summarize data files from inventory]. What were the main results?"

Cross-check with inventory:

  • If user mentions statistics, verify data files could support them
  • If user mentions figures, check they exist in figures/
  • If claims seem inconsistent with available data, ask for clarification

Ask for:

  1. Primary finding (the main result)
  2. Secondary findings (supporting results)
  3. Any unexpected or negative results

Question 3: Constraints

"I see from your config that you're targeting [journal] with a [word_limit] word limit.

Are there any other constraints I should know about?

  • Specific formatting requirements?
  • Required sections or subsections?
  • Exclusions (topics to avoid)?"

Question 4: Additional Context (Optional)

"Is there anything else I should know about this study?

For example:

  • Study limitations you want to acknowledge
  • Specific papers you want to cite or respond to
  • Clinical implications to emphasize"

Step 3: IRB Scope Comparison (If IRB Exists)

Skip this step if notes/irb-summary.md does not exist.

After gathering user's stated scope, compare it against IRB document and present discrepancies for confirmation.

Comparison Table

Present to user:

"I've compared your stated research scope with the IRB document.

Aspect IRB Document Your Stated Scope
Population [from IRB] [from user]
Sample size [from IRB] [from user]
Endpoints [from IRB] [from user]
Procedures [from IRB] [from user]

Please confirm:

  1. Are these differences intentional? (subset of approved protocol)
  2. Any context for the narrower scope? (e.g., 'questionnaire data not yet analyzed')
  3. Anything I've misunderstood?"

Document User Responses

Create notes/irb-scope-comparison.md:

# IRB vs Actual Scope Comparison

**Generated**: [timestamp]
**IRB Source**: [filename from irb-summary.md]

## Comparison

| Aspect | IRB Document | Actual Scope | Explanation |
|--------|--------------|--------------|-------------|
| Population | [from IRB] | [from user] | [user explanation] |
| Sample size | [from IRB] | [from user] | [user explanation] |
| Endpoints | [from IRB] | [from user] | [user explanation] |
| Procedures | [from IRB] | [from user] | [user explanation] |

## User Confirmation

- **Differences intentional?**: [yes/no + explanation]
- **Context for narrower scope**: [user response]
- **Clarifications**: [any corrections to understanding]

## Implications for Manuscript

- [Note any elements from IRB that should NOT appear in manuscript]
- [Note any elements that need careful framing]

This document provides audit trail and guides later steps when they need to understand why IRB and manuscript scope differ.

Step 4: Generate scope.md

After conversation, generate structured scope document:

# Manuscript Scope

Generated: [timestamp]

## Research Question

[User's research question, cleaned up if needed]

## Hypothesis

[Inferred or stated hypothesis]

## Key Findings

### Primary Finding
[Main result with expected statistics]

### Secondary Findings
1. [Finding 2]
2. [Finding 3]

### Negative/Null Results
- [If any]

## Target Publication

- **Journal**: [from config]
- **Word Limit**: [from config]
- **Citation Style**: [from config]

## Constraints

- [Any additional constraints from conversation]

## Study Context

### Population
[Inferred from data/conversation]

### Methods Overview
[Brief summary based on code inventory]

### Limitations to Address
- [User-specified limitations]

## Materials Available

### Literature
- [n] PDFs in papers/ folder
- Key papers to emphasize: [if mentioned]

### Data
- [List key data files and what they contain]

### Figures
- [List figures and what they show]

### Code
- Repository: [url]
- Analysis approach: [inferred from code inventory]

### IRB Document
- **Available**: [yes/no]
- **Ethics Approval Number**: [from irb-summary.md or "to be added manually"]
- **Scope Notes**: [see notes/irb-scope-comparison.md for differences]

## Writing Guidance

### Tone
[Infer from journal: clinical, technical, etc.]

### Emphasis
[What to highlight based on conversation]

### Avoid
[What to minimize or exclude]

Validation Checklist

Before saving scope.md, verify:

  • Research question is specific and answerable
  • Key findings are supported by available data
  • Word limit is realistic for content
  • All necessary context is captured
  • If IRB exists: discrepancies documented and confirmed by user

Output

Save to:

  • project/scope.md - Main scope document
  • notes/irb-scope-comparison.md - IRB comparison (if IRB exists)

Summarize back to user:

"I've created the scope document. Here's the summary:

Research Question: [question] Primary Finding: [finding]
Target: [journal], [word_limit] words

Ready to proceed with literature review?"

Return to parent skill.