Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/cc-scope-fit
Use when deciding whether a molecular / translational oncology study belongs in Cancer Cell (Cell Press) before investing in full submission. Diagnoses mechanism + translational-relevance fit; it does not design experiments or edit prose.
Passed 13 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 5 of 22 without it.
and 14 more in the full report
10 fixed3 passed either way7 still failing2 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 10 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Before sending a presubmission inquiry for our manuscript on immune checkpoint resistance in melanoma—where we identified a new tumor-microenvironment axis and verified it in cell lines, humanized mouse models, and patient biopsy cohorts—we need a rigorous scope audit. Please output your evaluation specifying: the scope verdict, a one-sentence mechanistic summary, the orthogonal systems validated, the translational hook and evidence level, the novel gap relative to existing papers in this field, and the recommended next step.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| The response output specifies the scope verdict as Strong fit. | Missed | Passed |
| The evaluation notes full validation across cell lines, in vivo models, and human patient samples. | Passed | Passed |
| The report confirms that the manuscript is ready for a presubmission inquiry. | Passed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Cancer Cell publishes mechanistic, hypothesis-driven cancer biology and translational oncology. The recurring acceptance pattern combines two pillars:
In-scope topics include tumor biology and signaling, cancer genetics / genomics, the tumor microenvironment, immuno-oncology, metastasis, therapy resistance, and clinical-translational studies that carry mechanistic insight.
| Signal in the manuscript | Fit verdict |
|---|---|
| Clear mechanism + validated in cells, in vivo, AND human/patient data | Strong fit |
| Mechanism + in vivo, human data is associative but supportive | Likely fit — strengthen human anchor |
| Mechanism only in cell lines, no in vivo, no human relevance | Off-fit — go back to cc-study-design |
| Descriptive omics / atlas with no mechanism or vulnerability | Off-fit unless reframed around a mechanism |
| Strong clinical correlation but no mechanism | Off-fit — likely a specialty / clinical journal |
| Methods / tool paper without a cancer-biology discovery | Off-fit — a methods journal |
| Therapeutic claim with only in vitro support | Premature — needs in vivo / human validation |
For a borderline paper, reduce the decision to three evidence questions before investing in a full
test cases passed, vs 5 / 22 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.