Skip to main content
Glama

jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

pcr_amplify

Amplify the subject template with a forward + reverse primer (pydna Anneal). Emits the first product as a NEW sequence record so downstream tools (digest, gel, map) operate on the amplicon, not the template — the tool→tool hand-off.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dmsoNoDMSO in the reaction, % (v/v) — depresses every primer Tm and therefore the annealing temperature. In %. Advanced.
limitNomin 3' footprint match length (pydna `limit`). In bp. Advanced.
_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.
forwardYesforward primer 5'→3'.
reverseYesreverse primer 5'→3'.
_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.
nn_tableNonearest-neighbour table the Tm and Ta are computed on. Left unset it is the panel's own default, SantaLucia & Hicks 2004 unified. Values: DNA_NN1 (Breslauer 1986), DNA_NN2 (Sugimoto 1996), DNA_NN3 (Allawi & SantaLucia 1997), DNA_NN4 (SantaLucia & Hicks 2004 (unified)), RNA_NN1 (Freier 1986 (RNA/RNA)), RNA_NN2 (Xia 1998 (RNA/RNA)), RNA_NN3 (Chen 2012 (RNA/RNA, GU wobble)), R_DNA_NN1 (Sugimoto 1995 (RNA/DNA hybrid)). Advanced.DNA_NN4
conditionsNothe reaction buffer every temperature here is computed in - Na+/K+/Tris/Mg2+/dNTPs, the primer concentration, the salt-correction method and the melting model. Left unset it is filled from your reaction-conditions settings, so this node and the PCR panel describe ONE tube; with neither it falls back to pydna's Taq defaults, which is what every golden was captured under. Advanced.
dmso_modelNowhich published DMSO depression to apply; they disagree by 2 °C at 8% DMSO, so a Tm quoted without naming one is not reproducible. Values: ahs01 (Ahsen et al. (2001)), mus81 (Musielski et al. (1981)), cul76 (Cullen and Bick (1976)), esc80 (Escara and Hutton (1980)). Only applies when dmso is set. Advanced.ahs01
end_lengthNo3'-most bases that must pair exactly whatever the mismatch budget (QUEEN `endlength`) — a polymerase extends from a paired 3' terminus, so this is not negotiable by the budget. Advanced.
mismatchesNosubstitutions a primer may carry and still prime (QUEEN `{s<=N}`). 0 is pydna's exact search, which is what the panel opens on and what every golden was captured under. Advanced.
inner_forwardNonested PCR: the inner forward primer 5'→3'. With `inner_reverse`, `forward`/`reverse` are the outer pair and every output below describes ROUND 2. Advanced.
inner_reverseNonested PCR: the inner reverse primer 5'→3'. Advanced.
dimer_thresholdNothe dimer-free cut-off `primerDimerScore` is judged against (PCR-35). The default is the value PrimerROC publishes, which that paper fitted on its own gels and says is specific to its PCR conditions — refit it on your own gel-scored pairs with `primerRocFit` rather than guessing one. Advanced.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recordYesthe amplicon as a sequence record (subject for downstream nodes)
sequenceYesamplicon sequence 5'→3'. Empty when the pair made no product
conditionsYesthe buffer every temperature here was measured in — salt, magnesium, dNTPs, oligo concentration, the salt-correction method and the NN table — or a note saying pydna's defaults were used
forwardTmCYesforward primer melting temperature, under the table and additives set above
reverseTmCYesreverse primer melting temperature
productCountYesnumber of products (>1 = non-specific pair)
crossDimerTmCYesthe forward x reverse 3'-end cross-dimer temperature — the primer-dimer that extends into a band. 0 when no such dimer exists, and a value far below the 35 °C limit is still a real structure: this is the number to compare pairs on, because the boolean beside it only reports primer3's design cutoff
annealingTempCYesannealing temperature for the first product, under the Taq convention. Null when the pair made no product
primerDimerRiskYestrue when the pair breaks one of primer3's own cross-dimer limits (35 °C at a 3' end, 45 °C anywhere) — branch a workflow on this rather than re-deriving it. FALSE IS NOT 'no dimer': those limits are primer3's design filter, and graded against 48 gel-tested pairs (Johnston et al., Sci Rep 9:209, 2019) they flag none of the 23 that produced a visible primer-primer band. Read `crossDimerTmC` beside it rather than branching on this alone
primerDimerScoreYesPrimerDimer's score for the pair (Johnston et al., Sci Rep 9:209, 2019: one hetero- and both homodimers, the most negative kept, clipped at 0). Lower is more dimer-prone. On 48 gel-tested pairs it separates real primer-dimer bands better than the thal Tm beside it (AUC 0.842 against 0.727), and on the paper's own 319 gel-scored pairs it reads 0.961 against 0.750. Read `primerDimerVerdict` beside it for the published cut-off rather than inventing a threshold. Null when a primer carries a base other than A, C, G or T
primerDimerCutoffYesthe dimer-free cut-off `primerDimerVerdict` was read against, so a turn never has to assume which threshold produced the verdict. -4.43 is the published value, fitted on the paper's own PCR conditions
primerDimerVerdictYestrue when `primerDimerScore` falls BELOW PrimerROC's dimer-free cut-off, which is the paper's own verdict rather than primer3's design filter (Johnston et al., Sci Rep 9:209, 2019). The cut-off defaults to the published -4.43 and is the `dimerThreshold` input: the paper fitted it on its own gels and says so, so a lab with its own gel data refits it with `primerRocFit`. Branch on this for the dimer question and on `primerDimerRisk` for the would-primer3-reject-this question — they answer different things. Null when a primer carries a base other than A, C, G or T
round1ProductCountYesnested PCR only: how many products the OUTER pair made in round 1 (the first one is re-amplified). Absent for a single-round run

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the operation emits the first product as a NEW sequence record rather than mutating the template, which clarifies state effects and the downstream hand-off. It could say more about failure/no-product behavior, but with annotations and an output schema the bar is lower.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the most decision-relevant fact (a new record is produced for downstream tools). No filler.

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?

Given a 14-parameter tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral nuance — that downstream tools act on the amplicon, not the template. It omits the nested-PCR round-2 behavior, but the schema documents that, so little agent-critical information is missing.

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%, with rich per-parameter docs (nested PCR, DMSO model, mismatch budget, etc.), so the baseline is 3. The description only gestures at the forward/reverse primers and adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, though the schema itself already carries the burden.

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 (Amplify) and resource (subject template with a forward + reverse primer) and names the underlying method (pydna Anneal). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like multiplex_pcr or fusion_pcr, but the output semantics it stresses (amplicon, not template) give an agent a clear mental model.

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 implies when to use it — as the amplification step whose amplicon feeds digest/gel/map — but it never states when to prefer it over multiplex_pcr, fusion_pcr, or a primer-design tool. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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