Grant Writing
- 16 installs
- 869 repo stars
- Updated June 8, 2026
- beita6969/scienceclaw
grant-writing is a Claude skill that guides research grant proposal writing including specific aims, significance, innovation, approach, and budget justification for funders like NIH, NSF, and ERC.
About
grant-writing is a Claude skill that guides research grant proposal writing, covering specific aims, significance framing, innovation articulation, approach design, and budget justification. A researcher uses it when drafting or revising a funding application for agencies like NIH, NSF, or ERC. It matters because it applies a step-by-step methodology and review-criteria checklist that mirrors how funders actually score proposals.
- Structured 7-step methodology for writing NIH/NSF/ERC research grant proposals
- Covers Specific Aims, Significance, Innovation, Approach, and budget justification
- Includes a 9-item quality checklist and reviewer-response format for resubmissions
Grant Writing by the numbers
- 16 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #1,049 of 1,879 Documentation skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
grant-writing capabilities & compatibility
Free; a prompt-only skill with no external dependencies or keys.
- Capabilities
- proposal writing · budget justification · reviewer response
- Use cases
- copywriting · research
- Pricing
- Free
What grant-writing says it does
Assists with research grant proposal writing including specific aims, significance framing, innovation articulation, approach design, and budget justification for NIH, NSF, ERC, and other funding agen
Write a one-page aims document with four elements
Check against review criteria (Significance, Investigators, Innovation, Approach, Environment for NIH). Ensure each criterion is explicitly addressed.
npx skills add https://github.com/beita6969/scienceclaw --skill grant-writingAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 16 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 869 |
| Last updated | June 8, 2026 |
| Repository | beita6969/scienceclaw ↗ |
What it does
Draft and refine research grant proposals (aims, significance, innovation, approach, budget) for NIH, NSF, ERC and other funders.
Who is it for?
Structuring and drafting NIH/NSF/ERC grant proposals and reviewer responses for resubmissions.
Skip if: Non-research or general business documents; the methodology is specific to research funding mechanisms.
When should I use this skill?
The user discusses a grant proposal, funding application, specific aims, or research funding strategy.
What you get
A structured, review-criteria-aligned grant proposal draft with aims, sections, budget, and timeline.
- Specific Aims one-page document
- Section drafts (Significance, Innovation, Approach)
- Budget table with justification
By the numbers
- 7-step methodology
- 9-item quality checklist
- 5 NIH review criteria addressed (Significance, Investigators, Innovation, Approach, Environment)
Files
When to Trigger
Activate this skill when the user mentions:
- Grant proposal, research funding, grant application
- Specific aims, significance, innovation, approach (NIH format)
- R01, R21, K award, NSF CAREER, ERC grants
- Budget justification, personnel effort, subcontracts
- Preliminary data, feasibility, research plan
- Broader impacts, dissemination plan
- Resubmission, reviewer critiques, summary statement
Step-by-Step Methodology
1. Identify the funding mechanism - Determine agency (NIH, NSF, DOD, ERC, private foundation), mechanism (R01, R21, CAREER, etc.), and specific FOA/RFA if applicable. Note page limits, formatting requirements, and review criteria. 2. Craft Specific Aims - Write a one-page aims document with four elements: (a) Opening paragraph establishing the problem and knowledge gap, (b) "What is known / what is missing" paragraph, (c) 2-3 specific aims with clear hypotheses and approaches, (d) Impact statement. Each aim should be independent yet synergistic. 3. Significance section - Articulate the burden of the problem (prevalence, cost, impact). Identify the critical barrier or knowledge gap. Explain how the proposed work will shift current understanding or practice. Cite relevant literature to establish context. 4. Innovation section - Highlight what is new: novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, or technologies. Distinguish from incremental advances. Position relative to the state of the art. 5. Approach section - For each aim: state rationale, describe methods in detail, present preliminary data, define expected outcomes, identify potential pitfalls with alternative strategies, and provide a timeline. Include rigor and reproducibility elements (biological variables, authentication of key resources). 6. Budget preparation - Justify personnel (% effort, roles), equipment, supplies, travel, and other costs. Align budget items with specific aims. Ensure modular budget vs. detailed budget used correctly. 7. Review and refinement - Check against review criteria (Significance, Investigators, Innovation, Approach, Environment for NIH). Ensure each criterion is explicitly addressed. Review for clarity, conciseness, and logical flow.
Key Resources
- NIH Reporter - Funded grants database for benchmarking
- NSF Award Search - Funded NSF proposals
- Grants.gov - Federal funding opportunities
- Specific FOA/RFA pages - Agency-specific requirements
- NIAID sample applications - Example funded proposals
Output Format
- Specific Aims as a structured one-page document.
- Section drafts with clear headers matching agency format.
- Budget as a table with line items, costs, and justification.
- Timeline as a Gantt chart or milestone table by aim and year.
- Reviewer-response table for resubmissions (critique, response, changes made).
Quality Checklist
- [ ] Specific aims are independent (failure of one does not sink the project)
- [ ] Knowledge gap clearly defined with supporting citations
- [ ] Preliminary data supports feasibility of each aim
- [ ] Potential pitfalls identified with concrete alternative approaches
- [ ] Budget aligned with proposed experiments
- [ ] Page limits and formatting requirements met
- [ ] Rigor and reproducibility addressed (NIH requirement)
- [ ] Broader impacts / translational potential articulated
- [ ] All required sections and attachments included
Related skills
Lark MarkdownInstantly turn any markdown file into clean, formatted Lark/Figma-compatible documents without manual reformatting.451k
Lark DocCreate, read, update, summarize, rewrite and manage Feishu/Lark cloud documents directly from agent workflows.391k15.9kLark WikiCreate, organize, query, and manage documents, spaces, and members inside Lark (Feishu) knowledge bases directly from AI agent workflows.387k15.9k
Opensource Guide CoachGet expert, attribution-safe guidance on launching and sustaining an open-source project.270k72Readme I18nMaintain consistent, updatable language selector blocks across every README variant in a multilingual repository.270k72
Domain ModelingBuild and sharpen a project's domain model: pin down domain terminology in a glossary and record architectural decisions as ADRs.267k192kFAQ
Which funding agencies does this skill cover?
It targets NIH, NSF, ERC and other funding agencies, including mechanisms like R01, R21, K awards, and NSF CAREER.
What does the Specific Aims document include?
A one-page document with an opening problem/knowledge-gap paragraph, a what-is-known/what-is-missing paragraph, 2-3 specific aims with hypotheses, and an impact statement.