Skip to main content
Glama

Jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

melting_temperature

Read-only

The melting temperature of an oligo IN A BUFFER, UNDER A MODEL — and the working, not just the number.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNowhich melting model — nn_santalucia (Nearest-neighbor, SantaLucia 1997) · nn_unified (Nearest-neighbor, unified 2004) · nn_sugimoto (Nearest-neighbor, Sugimoto 1996) · nn_breslauer (Nearest-neighbor, Breslauer 1986) · nn_rna_xia (RNA/RNA, Xia 1998) · nn_rna_chen (RNA/RNA, Chen 2012 (GU wobble)) · nn_rna_freier (RNA/RNA, Freier 1986) · nn_hybrid_sugimoto (RNA/DNA hybrid, Sugimoto 1995) · bresluc_dbd (Breslauer (dsDNA-binding polymerase)) · gc (GC-based (Tm_GC)) · wallace (Wallace rule (2·AT + 4·GC)) · neb (NEB). Advanced.nn_unified
oligoYesthe oligo to melt, 5'→3'. IUPAC ambiguity codes and whitespace are tolerated; at least 2 bases. An L after a base marks it LOCKED (LNA), e.g. GTCGLAACAGC — the marker is not a base and does not count toward the length.
_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.
conditionsNothe buffer this temperature is measured in: Na⁺/K⁺/Tris/Mg²⁺/dNTP under `salt`, the strand concentrations under `oligo`, and any DMSO or formamide under `additives`. Left unset it is filled from your reaction-conditions settings, which is what the Melting Temperature panel is showing, so the two doors cannot quote different temperatures for one oligo. Advanced.
dmso_methodNowhich published DMSO depression — ahs01 (Ahsen et al. (2001), 0.75 °C per %) · mus81 (Musielski et al. (1981), 0.6 °C per %) · cul76 (Cullen and Bick (1976), 0.5 °C per %) · esc80 (Escara and Hutton (1980), 0.675 °C per %). Only read when the conditions carry DMSO. Only applies when dmso is set. Advanced.ahs01

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gcYesGC content [%] of the oligo, weighted for ambiguity codes
tmYesmelting temperature [°C] after every correction the conditions asked for
modelYesthe model that produced it, named — never the id alone
stepsYesthe derivation, one row per correction: the base model with its table and salt method, then each additive with the degrees it removed AND the published model that set the coefficient — the same rows the panel prints, from the same generator
baseTmYesthe temperature BEFORE any additive, so a pipeline can see what DMSO or formamide cost rather than inferring it
caveatYeswhy this model's number should not be read for an oligo of this length, or empty when it can be — Wallace above its published 14–20 nt domain is the case this exists for
lockedBasesYeshow many bases of this oligo were read as LOCKED (LNA). 0 for ordinary DNA, so a pipeline can tell whether McTigue's increments were in play without parsing the steps
thermodynamicsYesΔH, ΔS and ΔG(37 °C) from the SAME table as the temperature, so a row never mixes two models. Absent for models that carry no nearest-neighbor table (GC formula, Wallace, NEB)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / baseTm / x-unit
      Added value: +"°C"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / gc / x-unit
      Added value: +"%"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / tm / x-unit
      Added value: +"°C"
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely useful behavioural facts beyond that: the result is conditional on buffer conditions and a named model, and the response returns the working rather than a bare number. It does not discuss defaults, settings inheritance, or units, though those live in the schema.

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 clause carries the substance, with the em-dash aside adding the output-shape hint. Nothing is redundant. The allusive, capitalised styling is slightly theatrical for a technical definition, but it costs no length.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is complex (six parameters, nested salt/oligo/additives objects) and the description is a single sentence, so it leans entirely on the rich schema and the existing output schema to be callable. That is adequate for invocation, but nothing tells the agent that unset conditions are inherited from reaction-conditions settings, which is the kind of caveat a one-line description could profitably carry.

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 nested conditions/model/oligo fields are exhaustively documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description reinforces the two controlling axes (buffer and model) but adds no syntax, units, or defaulting behaviour beyond what the schema already states.

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: it computes the melting temperature of an oligo, explicitly under a buffer and a chosen model. That framing distinguishes it from pure sequence utilities like gc_content, and the phrase 'the working, not just the number' signals a calculation with derivation. It stops short of naming the nearest sibling (melt_profile) that an agent would need to disambiguate against.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance: no prerequisites, no exclusions, and no mention of the alternatives among siblings (melt_profile, analyze_melt_curves, gc_content, primer_check). The buffer/model phrasing implies that conditions matter, but the agent must infer on its own when this tool is the right door versus the melting-profile tools.

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