Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Metabolomics research — metabolite identification, study analysis, and database searches across HMDB, MetaboLights, Metabolomics Workbench, KEGG. Use for annotating mass-spec features to known metabolites, finding metabolomics studies of a disease, and structured metabolomics research reports with metabolite-pathway mapping.
.claude/skills/mims-harvard-tooluniverse-metabolomics/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 113% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 103% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 218% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 161% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 82% | 0% |
Comprehensive metabolomics research skill that identifies metabolites, analyzes studies, and searches metabolomics databases. Generates structured research reports with annotated metabolite information, study details, and database statistics.
Use this skill when asked to:
Example queries:
Primary metabolite databases:
FooDB_get_compound (param fdb_id, e.g. "FDB000004") for a food compound's structure plus HMDB/KEGG/PubChem/ChEBI cross-references; ideal for food-metabolomics annotationThe skill executes a 4-phase analysis pipeline:
For each metabolite in the input list:
For provided study IDs:
For keyword searches:
Always included in reports:
Input:
Output report includes:
Input:
Output report includes:
Input:
Output report includes:
Input:
Output report includes:
List of metabolite names to identify and annotate.
["glucose"], ["lactate", "pyruvate", "acetate"]MetaboLights or Metabolomics Workbench study identifier.
"MTBLS1", "ST000001"Keyword to search metabolomics studies.
"diabetes", "glucose metabolism", "LC-MS"Target organism for study filtering.
"Homo sapiens""Mus musculus", "Saccharomyces cerevisiae"Path for the generated markdown report.
"my_analysis.md", "metabolomics_report.md"All analyses generate a structured markdown report with:
Header section:
Phase sections:
Database overview:
Error handling:
HMDB tools are SOAP-based and require special parameter handling:
HMDB_search: Requires operation="search" parameterHMDB_get_metabolite: Requires operation="get_metabolite" parameterendpoint or method parameters (not applicable to SOAP)Tools return different response formats - handle all three:
{status: "success", data: [...], metadata: {...}}[...] (e.g., metabolights_list_studies){field1: ..., field2: ...} (e.g., some detail endpoints)Always check response type with isinstance() before accessing fields.
Follow this hierarchy for robustness:
Write report incrementally to avoid memory issues:
The skill automatically discovers and uses these tools from ToolUniverse:
HMDB Tools:
HMDB_search: Search metabolites by nameHMDB_get_metabolite: Get detailed metabolite informationMetaboLights Tools:
metabolights_list_studies: List available studiesmetabolights_search_studies: Search studies by keywordmetabolights_get_study: Get study details by IDMetabolomics Workbench Tools:
MetabolomicsWorkbench_get_study: Get study informationMetabolomicsWorkbench_search_compound_by_name: Search compoundsPubChem Tools:
PubChem_get_CID_by_compound_name: Get PubChem CIDPubChem_get_compound_properties_by_CID: Get chemical propertiesNo manual tool configuration required - all tools loaded automatically.
Cause: HMDB search returned empty results or index error accessing first result Solution: This is expected for uncommon metabolites; PubChem fallback will be attempted
Cause: Study ID not found or API unavailable Solution: Verify study ID format (MTBLS or ST), check if study is public
Cause: Missing API keys for some databases Solution: Check .env.template, add required API keys to .env file (most metabolomics tools work without keys)
Cause: Pipeline queries each metabolite individually Solution: Reports limit to first 10 metabolites; consider batching for >20 metabolites
The Metabolomics Research skill provides comprehensive metabolomics analysis through a 4-phase pipeline that:
Key Features:
operation parameter)Best for:
Metabolite identification starts with the mass spectrum. LOOK UP DON'T GUESS — always search HMDB/PubChem with the calculated neutral mass rather than guessing identity from m/z alone.
Metabolite identification: HMDB IDs provide the strongest annotation when paired with experimental validation. A PubChem-only match (fallback) indicates the metabolite is chemically characterized but may lack biological context (pathways, disease associations). Always report the identification confidence level.
Pathway enrichment strategy: When multiple metabolites map to the same KEGG or HMDB pathway, enrichment is meaningful only if the input list is unbiased (not pre-selected for that pathway). Report hits vs. pathway size (3/5 detected is more informative than 3/500). LOOK UP DON'T GUESS — use HMDB_get_metabolite to get pathway annotations for each metabolite rather than assuming pathway membership from names alone.
Biomarker discovery reasoning: A candidate biomarker should show: (1) consistent direction of change across samples (fold-change > 1.5), (2) statistical significance (FDR-adjusted p < 0.05), (3) biological plausibility — LOOK UP the metabolite's known disease associations via HMDB, and (4) reproducibility in an independent cohort. Single-study HMDB associations are hypothesis-generating, not confirmatory. Check MetaboLights/Metabolomics Workbench for independent validation datasets.
A complete metabolomics report should answer:
Limitations:
See QUICK_START.md for Python SDK examples, MCP integration, and step-by-step tutorials.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-08 | pass→pass | 10,757 | 3,505 | -67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,816 | 3,683 | +103% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 30,978 | 7,821 | -75% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,840 | 3,735 | -36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 20,261 | 7,022 | -65% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,584 | 3,763 | +5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 10,540 | 8,086 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 796 | 3,673 | +361% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 8,586 | 12,590 | +47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,742 | 5,542 | +218% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 10,552 | 14,440 | +37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,235 | 5,834 | +161% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 15,100 | 13,782 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,538 | 5,406 | +113% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 11,177 | 4,103 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,125 | 3,868 | +82% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 12,394 | 9,867 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,510 | 4,986 | +99% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 17,936 | 6,517 | -64% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,105 | 4,168 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 16,180 | 13,826 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,793 | 5,521 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 13,839 | 9,538 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,365 | 4,882 | +106% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 14,874 | 12,550 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,427 | 4,815 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 11,269 | 13,672 | +21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,475 | 5,990 | +142% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 14,888 | 8,504 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,717 | 4,679 | +72% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 13,473 | 7,879 | -42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,247 | 4,318 | +92% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 14,812 | 9,704 | -34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,601 | 4,826 | +86% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 9,281 | 6,097 | -34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,435 | 3,939 | +174% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 7,286 | 6,176 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,389 | 4,256 | +206% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 18,803 | 31,515 | +68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,483 | 6,030 | +73% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 17,370 | 19,049 | +10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,050 | 6,415 | +110% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 15,225 | 13,265 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,638 | 5,190 | +97% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 19 counted toward the lift figure. The other 3 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +5 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 19 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.