Skip to main content
Glama

jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

auto_annotate

Find and name known features on the subject — vector parts, origins, resistance markers and tags — by exact match, by local alignment (which finds a diverged copy and reports the identity and coverage that earned it), or by both, on either strand and across the origin, plus Cre/loxP and Gateway att recognition sites. Emits an annotated record, so a downstream map or export carries the annotations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNohow to match a library entry: "exact" finds only a sequence spelled byte for byte, "alignment" finds a diverged copy and reports its identity and coverage, "both" runs each and keeps what only the other found.both
lox_pNodetect Cre/loxP-family recognition sites.
_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.
policyNowhat the emitted record does with the features it already had: `merge` keeps them all and skips a hit already there to the base, `overwrite` replaces a same-strand feature a hit overlaps, `clear` drops every existing feature first.merge
gatewayNodetect Gateway att recombination sites.
_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.
librariesNowhich feature corpora to search, by id (an id from annotation-library/manifest.json, or "legacy" for the unsourced set). Empty means all of them.
max_expectNoprotein corpora only: the E-value a translated (six-frame) match must beat to be reported. It also sets the score the search runs at, so a stricter cutoff is a faster scan. Advanced.
alternativesNoprotein corpora only: how many runners-up to keep on each call, so a near relative is reported rather than implied. Advanced.
genetic_codeNoprotein corpora only: the NCBI translation table the six frames are read under. 1 is the standard code. Advanced.
min_coverageNoprotein corpora only: drop a translated call covering less than this much of the database protein's own length. Advanced.
min_identityNoprotein corpora only: drop a translated call under this percent identity over the residues aligned. Advanced.
accepted_onlyNokeep only hits clearing the corpus authority's own acceptance policy (>=95% identity, with a coverage bar that depends on the feature's length). Also decides overlaps: a hit the authority would reject cannot displace one it would accept. Only applies when mode is alignment or both. Advanced.
greedy_gatewayNopermissive att core matching — finds more sites, including partial ones. Only applies when gateway is true. Advanced.
hide_fragmentsNohide hits covering under 95% of their database entry, which upstream calls fragments. Only applies when mode is alignment or both. Advanced.
min_pi_per_matchNolowest identity-weighted coverage worth reporting; upstream's own floor is 3, below which a hit is a fragment of a composite feature rather than the feature. Only applies when mode is alignment or both. Advanced.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recordYesthe subject with the found features added
featuresYesevery feature found, with its source detector
perSourceYeshit count per detector
featureCountYeshow many features were found

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations give readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false; the description adds useful context by saying it "emits an annotated record" whose annotations carry into a downstream map or export, explaining why the tool is not read-only. It does not mention permissions or limits, but the core behavioral consequence (a new annotated record rather than an in-place edit) is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and matching strategy; the second sentence efficiently covers the output behavior. The first sentence is dense and its parenthetical is heavy, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

For a 16-parameter, nested-schema tool with full schema coverage, annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, the matching modes and the output record, so an agent can select and invoke it. It is only incomplete in that it gives no routing guidance against the many sibling annotation/search tools.

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 all 16 parameters are already documented, including mode, policy, and the protein-corpus thresholds. The description adds the conceptual framing of exact vs alignment matching and the site classes it recognizes, but no syntax or edge-case meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description gives a specific verb+resource (find and name known features such as vector parts, origins, resistance markers and tags) and immediately specifies the matching strategies (exact, local alignment, both) and special site classes (Cre/loxP, Gateway att). It is clearly more than a restatement of the name, but it never names a sibling (e.g. annotate_region, audit_cds_annotations) to sharpen the boundary.

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?

The description explains what the tool does and the mode variants, which implies the annotation use case, but it never states when to reach for this over annotate_region or the various find_* siblings, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is left to inference from the field descriptions.

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