Skip to main content
Glama

Jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

alignment_window

Read-only

Read one window of a BAM or SAM in this project: its reads, the depth across it, and what the pairs say about the library — the same window, filters and record cap the pileup draws.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locusNothe window, as a locus string (`ctgA:1-50,001`). Unset, it is the whole of the alignment's first reference — the window the panel opens on.
_filesNoThe project: record references shaped like _subject. Their records become library documents a tool names in sequences/parts/document; a trace or alignment is found by file name.
_subjectNoThe record to act on: exactly one of sequence, accession (+source), sample (an id from list_samples) or file ({name, text} or {name, base64}); record_index picks one record of several.
min_mapqNohide reads below this mapping quality, as the pane’s Filter reads operation does. The reads are still counted — `hidden` says how many this removed.
alignmentNowhich BAM or SAM in this project, by name. Unset, it is the project's only alignment — and it refuses rather than guessing when there is more than one.
max_readsNothe record cap. More reads than this overlap the window and the result is an even SAMPLE of them, with `sampled` saying so — the pane’s own cap is the default.
hide_secondaryNodrop secondary alignments (FLAG 0x100).
hide_duplicatesNodrop reads marked as PCR or optical duplicates (FLAG 0x400).
hide_supplementaryNodrop supplementary alignments (FLAG 0x800).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
readsYesthe reads in the window after filters: name, reference, 1-based start and end, strand, MAPQ, CIGAR, TLEN and sequence — the shape an alignment or a screen takes
hiddenYesreads in the window the filters removed — 0 with an active filter is a real answer
windowYesthe window actually read, as a locus string
sampledYesmore reads overlap the window than the cap allows, so `reads` is an even sample rather than all of them
coverageYesthe depth profile as bins across the window, in order
depthPlotYesthe coverage track as the pileup draws it: each bin's lowest, mean and highest per-base depth over ALL reads, so a dropout narrower than a bin still shows in the minimum
depth_maxYesthe deepest bin
depth_meanYesmean depth across the window’s coverage bins, over ALL reads — the coverage track is full-depth, as BamView’s is, so filters do not move it
read_countYeshow many reads that is
insert_sizeYesthe |TLEN| band this library’s own proper pairs define — `min`, `max` and whether it was MEASURED here or is the untuned fallback, which is what decides whether an insert is abnormal

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / depthPlot
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "the coverage track as the pileup draws it: each bin's lowest, mean and highest per-base depth over ALL reads, so a dropout narrower than a bin still shows in the minimum",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "mark": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "line",
      +        "bar",
      +        "point"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "rules": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "properties": {
      +          "label": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "y": {
      +            "type": "number"
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "required": [
      +          "y",
      +          "label"
      +        ],
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "series": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "properties": {
      +          "name": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "y": {
      +            "items": {
      +              "type": [
      +                "number",
      +                "null"
      +              ]
      +            },
      +            "type": "array"
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "required": [
      +          "name",
      +          "y"
      +        ],
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "title": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "x": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "type": "number"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "xLabel": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "yLabel": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "x",
      +    "series",
      +    "xLabel",
      +    "yLabel"
      +  ],
      +  "type": [
      +    "object",
      +    "null"
      +  ]
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "reads",
      -  "read_count",
      -  "hidden",
      -  "sampled",
      -  "window",
      -  "depth_mean",
      -  "depth_max",
      -  "coverage",
      -  "insert_size"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "reads",
      +  "read_count",
      +  "hidden",
      +  "sampled",
      +  "window",
      +  "depth_mean",
      +  "depth_max",
      +  "coverage",
      +  "depthPlot",
      +  "insert_size"
      +]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructiveness, but the description adds real behavior: filtered reads are still counted with a 'hidden' tally, and an over-cap window returns an even SAMPLE flagged by 'sampled' rather than truncating. It also implies a refusal on ambiguity, which is genuinely useful operational context beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first, and every clause carries information (window scope, outputs, parity with the pileup). The trailing em-dash clause about 'what the pairs say about the library' is slightly opaque, but nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With 9 parameters, nested record objects, zero required params, and an output schema present, the description does the right job: it says what is read, how sampling and filtering affect the result, and defers return-value structure to the output schema. Only the sibling routing remains under-specified.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so every parameter already carries its own definition, including the FLAG-based hide_* filters and the default record cap. The description adds only the general framing that filters and a record cap exist, plus the sampled/hidden return semantics — no syntax or default detail beyond the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource — 'Read one window of a BAM or SAM in this project' — and enumerates the outputs (reads, depth, pair/library signals). It positions itself relative to the pileup pane but never names a sibling tool it differs from, so an agent must infer the boundary with tools like browse_region or map_reads.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'the same window, filters and record cap the pileup draws' tells the agent this mirrors the panel's view, and the alignment param description notes it refuses rather than guessing when several alignments exist. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative among the many alignment-related siblings.

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