plan-spectroscopic-analysis
정보
이 스킬은 결정 매트릭스를 통해 적절한 분광 분석 기법을 선택하고 비파괴적 방법에서 파괴적 방법 순으로 분석 순서를 구성함으로써, 개발자들이 분광 분석 캠페인을 계획하는 데 도움을 줍니다. 사용자가 분석 목적을 정의하고 시료를 평가하며 교차 검증을 통한 성공 기준을 수립하도록 안내합니다. 미지 화합물을 조사하거나 특정 과학적 질문에 답하기 위해 분석 순서를 최적화할 때 활용하세요.
빠른 설치
Claude Code
추천npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanacgit clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/plan-spectroscopic-analysisClaude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요
문서
Plan Spectroscopic Analysis
Design spectroscopic campaign: pick right techniques, sequence efficiently, define success criteria → answer specific analytical question.
Use When
- Investigate unknown compound → which spectroscopic techniques?
- Optimize analysis sequence → preserve sample for destructive methods
- Plan sample prep before instrument time
- Cross-validate complementary techniques
- Budget instrument time + prioritize when resources limited
- Train new analysts in systematic planning
In
- Required: Analytical question (structure ID, quantitation, purity, functional group screen, reaction monitoring)
- Required: Sample desc (physical state, qty, known/suspected class)
- Optional: Available instruments + capabilities
- Optional: Budget + time constraints
- Optional: Safety data (toxicity, reactivity, volatility, light)
- Optional: Prior data (if any)
Do
Step 1: Define Analytical Question
Clarify info needed before picking technique.
-
Classify question:
- Structure ID: Full molecular structure of unknown. Broadest set.
- Structure confirm: Known compound matches expected. Few, focused on diagnostics.
- Quantitative: Concentration of known analyte. Calibration + good linearity (UV-Vis, NMR w/ internal std).
- Purity: Impurities present? Identify? High sensitivity + separation.
- Functional group screen: Which groups present, no full structure. IR often enough.
- Reaction monitor: Track reaction over time. Speed + compatibility w/ conditions (in situ IR, Raman, UV-Vis).
-
Success criteria: Explicit. Structure ID → "single proposal consistent w/ all data". Quantitation → "concentration w/ <5% rel error".
-
Existing knowledge: Compile (elemental analysis, reaction scheme, expected product, lit precedent). Constrains problem, fewer techniques needed.
→ Clear analytical question w/ success criteria + existing knowledge summary.
If err: question vague ("characterize this") → narrow w/ requestor. Vague → unfocused → wasted instrument time.
Step 2: Assess Sample Characteristics
Eval sample → which techniques feasible.
- Physical state: Solid (crystalline, amorphous, powder), liquid, solution, gas, thin film, biological tissue. Each constrains prep + technique.
- Quantity: Total mass/vol. NMR needs mg, MS µg, SERS ng.
- Solubility: Test/estimate in common solvents (water, methanol, DMSO, chloroform, hexane). NMR → deuterated solvent. UV-Vis → transparent.
- Stability: Thermal (GC-MS needs volatilization), photo (Raman uses laser), air/moisture (KBr pellet), solution (time-dependent).
- Safety: Toxicity, flammability, reactivity, radioactivity. Affects handling, may exclude techniques (volatile toxics → no open-atmosphere Raman w/o containment).
- MW range: Small (<1000 Da) vs polymers/biomolecules (>1000 Da) → different MS ionization + NMR strategies.
→ Sample characterization summary: state, qty, solubility, stability, hazards, MW range.
If err: can't characterize adequately (qty too small to test solubility) → conservative: start non-destructive minimal-sample (Raman, ATR-IR), reassess after.
Step 3: Select Techniques via Decision Matrix
Pick most informative techniques based on question + sample.
| Technique | Best For | Sample Needs | Destructive? | Sensitivity | Key Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1H NMR | H connectivity, integration, coupling | 1--10 mg in deuterated solvent | No | mg | Requires solubility, insensitive |
| 13C NMR | Carbon skeleton, functional groups | 10--50 mg in deuterated solvent | No | mg | Very insensitive, long acquisition |
| 2D NMR | Full connectivity, stereochemistry | 5--20 mg in deuterated solvent | No | mg | Hours of instrument time |
| IR (ATR) | Functional group ID | Any solid/liquid, minimal prep | No | ug | Water interference, fingerprint overlap |
| IR (KBr) | Functional group ID, transmission | 1--2 mg solid in KBr pellet | No* | ug | Moisture sensitive, sample mixed |
| Raman | Symmetric modes, aqueous samples | Any state, no prep for solids | No | ug--mg | Fluorescence, photodegradation |
| EI-MS | Volatile small molecules, fragmentation | ug, must be volatile | Yes (GC-MS) | ng--ug | Requires volatility |
| ESI-MS | Polar/large molecules, MW determination | Solution in volatile solvent | Yes | pg--ng | Adduct complexity, ion suppression |
| MALDI-MS | Polymers, proteins, large molecules | Solid + matrix | Yes | fmol | Matrix interference below 500 Da |
| UV-Vis | Chromophores, quantitation | Solution, ug--mg | No | ug | Limited structural information |
*IR with KBr is non-destructive to the molecule but the sample cannot be easily recovered from the pellet.
- Match question to technique: Structure ID → NMR + MS + IR min. Functional group → IR only. Quantitation → UV-Vis or NMR best.
- Feasibility: Cross-ref candidates w/ Step 2 sample. Eliminate incompatible (GC-MS for non-volatile, NMR for paramagnetic).
- Prioritize by info density: Rank by info per question.
- Cost + availability: If equal info, prefer faster, cheaper, more available.
→ Ranked list of techniques w/ justification + excluded ones w/ reasons.
If err: no single sufficient (common for structure ID) → plan complementary techniques together. None suitable → note limitation, recommend alts (derivatization → GC-MS).
Step 4: Plan Sample Prep per Technique
Prep reqs per selected technique.
- NMR prep: Dissolve 1-50 mg in 0.5-0.7 mL deuterated solvent. Solvent by solubility + spectral window:
| Solvent | 1H Residual | Use When |
|---|---|---|
| CDCl3 | 7.26 ppm | Non-polar to moderately polar compounds |
| DMSO-d6 | 2.50 ppm | Polar compounds, broad solubility |
| D2O | 4.79 ppm | Water-soluble compounds, peptides |
| CD3OD | 3.31 ppm | Polar organic compounds |
| C6D6 | 7.16 ppm | Aromatic region overlap avoidance |
-
IR prep: Method by sample state:
- ATR: Solid/liquid direct on crystal. Fastest, minimal prep.
- KBr pellet: Grind 1-2 mg w/ 100-200 mg dry KBr, press into transparent disk.
- Solution cell: Dissolve in IR-transparent solvent (CCl4, CS2). Limited transparency windows.
- Thin film: Cast from solution onto NaCl/KBr window. Polymers + oils.
-
MS prep: Match ionization to sample:
- EI (GC-MS): Sample volatile. Volatile solvent (DCM, hexane).
- ESI (LC-MS): ESI-compatible solvent (methanol/water, acetonitrile/water w/ 0.1% formic acid).
- MALDI: Mix w/ matrix (DHB, CHCA, sinapinic acid), dry on target.
-
UV-Vis prep: UV-transparent solvent. Conc → absorbance at lambda-max 0.1-1.0. Matched cuvettes for sample + ref.
-
Raman prep: Minimal. Solids neat. Liquids in glass vials (weak Raman). Avoid fluorescent containers. Aqueous solutions OK (water = weak Raman scatterer).
→ Prep protocol per technique: solvents, qtys, special handling.
If err: qty insufficient for all → prioritize by Step 3 hierarchy. Insoluble in all suitable → solid-state techniques (ATR-IR, Raman, solid-state NMR, MALDI-MS).
Step 5: Sequence + Cross-Validation Strategy
Order analyses → preserve sample, max info flow.
-
Sequence by destructiveness: Non-destructive first, destructive last.
- Tier 1 (non-destructive, no prep): Raman, ATR-IR
- Tier 2 (non-destructive, requires prep): UV-Vis, NMR (sample often recoverable by evaporation)
- Tier 3 (destructive or consumes sample): MS (ESI, EI/GC-MS, MALDI)
-
Info flow: Early results refine later:
- IR/Raman functional groups → choose NMR experiments (no carbonyl in IR → skip carbonyl-focused 13C).
- MW from MS → interpret NMR (integration ratios, peak count).
- NMR connectivity → interpret MS fragmentation.
-
Cross-validation points: Where techniques must agree:
- Molecular formula: MS (mol ion) = NMR (H + C count) = elemental analysis.
- Functional groups: IR assignments consistent w/ NMR shifts + MS fragmentation.
- Degree of unsaturation: From formula (MS) = observed rings + double bonds (NMR, UV-Vis).
-
Contingencies: What if ambiguous:
- NMR unexpected complexity → run 2D (COSY, HSQC, HMBC).
- MS mol ion ambiguous → different ionization or HRMS.
- IR dominated by one group → Raman for complementary.
-
Document plan: Written plan w/ sequence, prep, turnaround, decision points.
→ Complete ordered plan w/ prep, cross-validation, contingencies doc'd.
If err: plan can't complete due to sample/instrument → doc limitations, propose best achievable subset.
Check
- Analytical question clear w/ explicit success criteria
- Sample characteristics assessed (state, qty, solubility, stability, hazards)
- Techniques selected via decision matrix w/ justifications
- Infeasible techniques excluded w/ reasons
- Sample prep planned per technique
- Analysis sequence non-destructive → destructive
- Cross-validation points defined
- Contingency experiments ID'd for ambiguous
- Total sample consumption estimated vs available qty
Traps
- Skip planning: Jumping to nearest instrument → wastes sample + time. 15 min planning saves hours of re-analysis.
- Pick by habit not need: Not every analysis needs NMR. Functional group confirm → only IR. Match technique to question.
- Underestimate sample reqs: Running out mid-sequence avoidable. Calc total upfront + 20% reserve.
- Destructive methods first: GC-MS before NMR → NMR needs separate aliquot. Non-destructive first → max info per mg.
- Neglect solvent compat: Sample in DMSO-d6 (NMR) → not easy for GC-MS (non-volatile). Plan solvents across all.
- No cross-validation strategy: No checkpoints → contradictory results unnoticed until final interp.
→
interpret-nmr-spectrum— interpret NMR per this planinterpret-ir-spectrum— interpret IR per this planinterpret-mass-spectrum— interpret MS per this planinterpret-uv-vis-spectrum— interpret UV-Vis per this planinterpret-raman-spectrum— interpret Raman per this planvalidate-analytical-method— validate quantitative methods from this plan
GitHub 저장소
연관 스킬
evaluating-llms-harness
테스팅이 Claude Skill은 MMLU, GSM8K를 포함한 60개 이상의 표준화된 학술 과제에서 LLM 성능을 벤치마크하기 위해 lm-evaluation-harness를 실행합니다. 개발자들이 모델 품질을 비교하고, 학습 진행 상황을 추적하거나 학술 결과를 보고할 수 있도록 설계되었습니다. 이 도구는 HuggingFace와 vLLM 모델을 포함한 다양한 백엔드를 지원합니다.
cloudflare-cron-triggers
테스팅이 스킬은 cron 표현식을 사용하여 Worker를 스케줄링하기 위한 Cloudflare Cron Triggers 구현에 관한 포괄적인 지식을 제공합니다. 주기적 작업, 유지보수 작업, 자동화된 워크플로우 설정 방법을 다루며, 잘못된 cron 표현식이나 시간대 문제 같은 일반적인 이슈들을 해결하는 방법을 포함합니다. 개발자들은 이를 통해 스케줄된 핸들러 구성, cron 트리거 테스트, Workflows 및 Green Compute와의 연동 작업을 수행할 수 있습니다.
webapp-testing
테스팅이 Claude Skill은 Python 스크립트를 통해 로컬 웹 애플리케이션을 테스트하기 위한 Playwright 기반 툴킷을 제공합니다. 프론트엔드 검증, UI 디버깅, 스크린샷 캡처, 로그 확인 기능을 지원하며 서버 라이프사이클을 관리합니다. 브라우저 자동화 작업에 사용하되 컨텍스트 오염을 방지하기 위해 소스 코드를 읽지 않고 스크립트를 직접 실행하세요.
finishing-a-development-branch
테스팅이 스킬은 테스트 통과를 확인한 후 체계적인 통합 옵션을 제시하여 개발자가 완성된 작업을 마무리하도록 돕습니다. 구현이 완료된 후 머지, PR 생성, 브랜치 정리와 같은 워크플로우를 안내합니다. 코드가 준비되고 테스트가 완료되었을 때 개발 프로세스를 체계적으로 마무리하기 위해 사용하세요.
