Skip to main content
Glama

jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

read_sequencing_qc

Read-only

Read the QC files a sequencing provider returns alongside the reads: a per-base COVERAGE table, or a Plasmidsaurus summary (k-mer composition and the contamination estimate with its named source). These are the numbers that say whether a disappointing read is the clone's fault or the run's — a base called wrong under 3x coverage is a sequencing problem, not a cloning one. For a coverage table it also measures the track's SHAPE, because a mean has none: a run averaging 200x with one uncovered region reads as excellent. The provider states one number and two shapes — 20x for an accurate consensus, and a large gap or a sudden large increase meaning an assembly issue or a mixture of plasmid species — so the longest stretch under the line and the largest change in level are both measured and located. How large is large is NOT a number they publish, and none is invented here: the shapes are reported and the call is the reader's.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNowhich report this is; `auto` sniffs it. Values: auto (Detect from the contents), perbase (Per-base coverage table), plasmidsaurus (Plasmidsaurus summary).auto
textYesthe file's contents — a per-base coverage TSV (pos / ref / reads_all), or the provider's summary text.
_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.
step_windowNopositions either side of a boundary whose MEDIAN depth is compared, when looking for a sudden change in level. A median over a window rather than two adjacent positions, so one spike is not a step and a real change in level is. Advanced.
coverage_lineNothe depth a position must reach to count as well covered. The default is the provider's own published line and nothing of ours; raise it for a construct you intend to publish.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYeswhich report was actually read
shapeYesthe coverage track's SHAPE: its median, how many positions fall under the line and in how many separate runs, the longest such run with its coordinates and its floor, and the largest change in level with the position it is at
perbaseYesper-base coverage: positions counted, mean/min/max read depth, and how many positions reach 20x
readingYeswhat the coverage track says, generated from the profile that was measured rather than from the request, with the provider's own sentence quoted as theirs
longestGapYespositions in the longest unbroken stretch under the coverage line — the provider's first warning shape. 0 means no position falls under it; null for a Plasmidsaurus summary, which has no track
minCoverageYesthe LOWEST depth anywhere in the read — the number that decides whether a disagreement with the reference is believable. Null for a Plasmidsaurus summary, which measures no depth
plasmidsaurusYesthe whole parsed summary, including the raw text it came from
largestStepFoldYesthe largest sustained rise in depth, as a multiple — the provider's second warning shape. Branch on this rather than re-deriving it from the profile. Null when no step could be measured (a track shorter than two windows, or a Plasmidsaurus summary): a 0 is not a fold
contaminationPctYesPlasmidsaurus' contamination estimate, as a percentage. Null when the summary states none, and for a coverage table: a 0 would read as a clean run nobody measured
positionsAbove20xYespositions at 20x or better, out of the total. Null for a Plasmidsaurus summary
contaminationSourceYeswhat the provider says the contaminant IS — the half of the estimate that tells you what to do about it. Null when the summary names none, and for a coverage table

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds domain behavior beyond that — it discloses exactly what is computed for a coverage table (longest stretch below the line, largest change in level, both located) and, importantly, that no 'large' threshold is invented. It also ties the two shape signatures (gap, sudden increase) to their biological meanings.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, but the prose is dense, em-dash-heavy, and restates the same idea twice (the shape measurements 'are both measured and located' and again 'reported and the call is the reader's'). Several sentences carry interpretive flavor that could be trimmed without losing call-relevant information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the read-only profile. The description supplies interpretation guidance for a tool whose complexity (two report formats, shape detection, coverage thresholds) warrants it. It is adequate, though the prose spends more on rationale than on operational edges (e.g. malformed/undetected kind).

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above baseline by giving the rationale behind coverage_line ('the provider's own published line and nothing of ours; raise it for a construct you intend to publish') and step_window (median over a window so 'one spike is not a step'), mapping the parameters to the domain reasoning rather than restating types.

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+resource: reads QC files (per-base coverage table or Plasmidsaurus summary) that a sequencing provider returns alongside reads. The two report kinds are named, so the agent knows the tool's scope. It never explicitly differentiates itself from nearby siblings such as verify_read or recompute_trace_quality, so no sibling-routing credit.

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 framing ('whether a disappointing read is the clone's fault or the run's') tells the agent this is for diagnosing a poor sequencing result, which is real context. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not and no named alternative, so the agent must infer routing.

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