Skip to main content
Glama

find_genes_and_predict_expression

Read-only

Find genes in a sequence, then predict each gene's expression (composite).

    Server-side chaining in ONE call: finds genes (transcript intervals,
    with their TSS) in the sequence, then predicts expression off each
    discovered TSS in the given experimental context. This is the right
    tool whenever you want expression for a raw region or sequence — e.g.
    "find the genes in chr8:… and predict their expression in K562".
    predict_expression scores ONE TSS window and needs you to know where
    that TSS is (either a pre-centred 9,198 bp window or a `tss_index`);
    this tool discovers every gene's TSS itself. It has no 9,198 bp floor
    and no tss_index; it starts with gene finding, so it takes
    1,000–500,000 bp.

    Runs async internally at every size (the annotate stage is slow even
    for small inputs), so progress always streams. With wait=True
    (default), blocks and streams progress, then returns the result
    {data, meta} — it never returns a job_id on this path. With wait=False
    (detached), returns {data: {job_id, status: 'submitted'}} immediately —
    poll it with get_job. Because it ends in expression, `description`
    (cell type / assay context) is REQUIRED.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoDefault True: block and stream progress until the result is ready. Set False for detached mode — returns a job_id immediately to poll with get_job.
sequenceNoDNA bases, 1,000-500,000 bp (line breaks ignored). Mutually exclusive with sequence_ref.
descriptionNoREQUIRED experimental context — cell type / assay / conditions (e.g. 'K562 cell line'), applied to every found gene. The workflow ends in expression, which the API rejects without it.
sequence_refNoStored sequence handle. Mutually exclusive with sequence.
sequence_nameNoLabel echoed back.sequence

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / sequence / description
      Previous value: -"DNA bases. Mutually exclusive with sequence_ref."New value: +"DNA bases, 1,000-500,000 bp (line breaks ignored). Mutually exclusive with sequence_ref."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations by revealing async behavior, progress streaming, blocked vs. detached return shapes, the absence of a job_id on the blocking path, polling behavior on the detached path, and the hard requirement for expression-oriented description. No annotation contradiction exists.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than average but every sentence earns its place: first sentence states the purpose, then it scopes usage, differentiates from sibling tools, covers async modes, return shapes, and a required parameter. It is well structured, front-loaded, and contains no tautology or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity—server-side chaining, dual wait modes, async behavior, required context, and comparison to siblings—the description fully equips an agent to select and invoke it correctly. Output schema exists, so return values need no further explanation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions already cover all 5 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful context beyond the schema: explanation of why description is required, the 1,000–500,000 bp length constraint in operational terms, and clarification of wait modes. This justifies a 4 rather than a 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Find genes in a sequence, then predict each gene's expression (composite).' It clearly states server-side chaining and explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling predict_expression tool, making its scope and distinct value unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says when to use this tool ('whenever you want expression for a raw region or sequence'), contrasts it with predict_expression ('scores ONE TSS window and needs you to know where that TSS is'), and gives practical operational guidance including sequence length range, wait=True/False modes, polling with get_job, and the required description parameter.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources