Skip to main content
Glama

jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

copy_number_regions

Read-only

Place an Affymetrix copy-number sample's own calls in ClinGen's curated regions: for each region, which gains, losses or stretches of homozygosity fall in it, at what reciprocal overlap, and how much of the region they cover between them. Regions come from ClinGen's dosage-sensitivity curation, cached with its retrieval date — a loss is reported against the region's haploinsufficiency score and a gain against its triplosensitivity score, and no score is claimed for LOH or mosaic events, which change no copy number. NO THRESHOLD IS APPLIED: every overlap is reported with its numbers and which calls are worth reporting is a laboratory's judgement. Regions ClinGen has not placed on this build are listed separately and are NOT reported as clean.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileNowhich copy-number file in this project, by name. Unset, it is the project's only one — and it refuses rather than guessing when there is more than one.
buildNowhich assembly's curated region list to place the calls on. Unset is the build THIS FILE states about itself, and the node refuses rather than guessing when it states none — a region is a pair of coordinates, and placing a call on the wrong assembly moves every boundary by hundreds of kilobases with nothing to show it. Values: hg19 (hg19 / GRCh37), hg38 (hg38 / GRCh38).
_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.
regionsNoa BED region file in this project, by name, to check against INSTEAD of ClinGen's curated list — the laboratory's own panel, which is what ChAS calls the CytoRegion file. Unset is ClinGen. A BED line states no dosage score, so with this set every hit comes back with dosage null: the list says where to look and claims nothing about what a change there means. If the file states an assembly on its track line (`track ... db=hg19`) and it is not the build being read, the node refuses rather than moving every boundary by hundreds of kilobases.
_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.
data_setNowhich data set to scan, by name. Unset is the file's FIRST, which is what the panel opens on.
min_basesNoignore any call spanning fewer bases than this. Default 0, for the same reason as min_markers. Note a single-marker call spans 0 bases.
min_markersNoignore any call shorter than this many markers. The default counts everything the file called, because a reporting floor belongs to the laboratory and not to this tool — and it is the same floor copy_number_findings applies, so both doors place the same calls.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regionsYesone entry per curated region containing at least one call: id (the ISCA identifier a report cites), name, cytoband, chrom, start, end (0-based half-open), covered (fraction of the region the calls cover between them, each base counted once, so it never exceeds 1), counts by finding kind, and hits — each with the finding itself, overlapBases, reciprocalOverlap (the SMALLER of the two containment fractions, so a focal call inside a whole-arm region scores low rather than 100%), regionCovered, and dosage/dosageAxis: ClinGen's score and description for the axis that speaks to that call's direction, or null for LOH and mosaic events, which change no copy number
summaryYeshow many curated regions contain a call, out of how many were checked, on which build
unplacedYescurated regions ClinGen has NOT placed on this build — it states their location as 'tbd'. They carry id, name, cytoband and their dosage scores but no coordinates, so nothing could be checked against them. They are NOT clean: they are unchecked. Empty on hg19, which places all of them
provenanceYeswhich region list answered: its authority, source URL, the curation date the file states, the assembly, and how many regions were placed and unplaced. A cached copy of an authority's table is only interpretable with its version beside it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description carries the behavioral burden and delivers: regions are cached with a retrieval date, loss is scored against haploinsufficiency and gain against triplosensitivity, no score is claimed for LOH/mosaic, no overlap threshold is applied, and regions absent from the build are listed separately rather than silently passed as clean. It also discloses that the node refuses rather than guessing on ambiguous build/file inputs.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the opening clause and every subsequent clause carries information, but the body is delivered as two extremely long multi-clause sentences, which makes it denser and harder to scan than it needs to be for its length. Nothing is padding, but the structure could be broken up profitably.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and 100% schema coverage means parameters are documented. The description fills the remaining gaps — scoring semantics, caching, refusal behavior, and the reporting-floor philosophy — leaving little an agent would need beyond it; only the framework-level _files and _subject plumbing goes unmentioned, which is expected.

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 description coverage is 100% and the per-parameter descriptions are unusually rich (refusal semantics, defaults rationale, BED track-line enforcement), so the baseline is 3. The description body adds a little framing — the no-threshold stance and the dosage-null behavior of a lab panel — but largely restates what the schema already documents, so it does not meaningfully exceed the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — placing an Affymetrix copy-number sample's calls into ClinGen curated dosage-sensitivity regions — and enumerates the outputs (which gains/losses/LOH fall in each region, reciprocal overlap, region coverage). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as copy_number_findings, copy_number_loh, or copy_number_segment, which produce calls rather than overlap them against curated regions.

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 implied rather than stated: the description explains what the tool does with regions, the lab-panel override, and the no-threshold stance, but never says when to reach for this tool instead of copy_number_findings, copy_number_loh, or annotate_region. The one comparative hint — that min_markers is 'the same floor copy_number_findings applies' — lives in the parameter schema, not the description. No explicit when-not guidance is offered.

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