Skip to main content
Glama

Jean — Molecular Biology & Genomics

tide_quantify_indels

Read-only

Quantify a CRISPR edit from a pair of Sanger traces by TIDE (Brinkman et al.) — the abundance of each indel SIZE in the sequenced population, with a p-value per size class, the total editing efficiency, the goodness of fit, and the base composition of the +1 insertion.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guideYesthe guide spacer, RNA accepted. TIDE decomposes around ONE break, so this is a single guide rather than a list — it is located in the control on either strand and the break is placed three bases 5-prime of the PAM.
_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.
editedYesthe EDITED trace, by file name or id.
controlYesthe UNEDITED trace, by file name or id — every indel class is the control trace shifted, so this read IS the model.
seq_endNolast base of the READ to use, clamped down to the shorter of the two reads if it overruns. In bp.
_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.
max_shiftNolargest indel size modeled, in both directions. One basis function is fitted per size from -max_shift to +max_shift, so this bounds what can be reported at all. In bp.
seq_startNofirst base of the READ to use. The start of a Sanger read is poor quality; upstream's own web app starts at 100. In bp.
window_endNolast base of the decomposed region. 0 = as far as the shorter read allows. In bp. Advanced.
p_thresholdNoan indel class is called PRESENT below this p-value. A 0% class and a non-significant class are different answers, which is why this is a knob rather than a constant. Advanced.
window_startNofirst base of the decomposed region. 0 asks the engine to place the window after the break itself, which is what upstream does when given no boundaries. In bp. Advanced.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
indelsYesevery modeled size from -max_shift to +max_shift with its percentage, p-value and whether it cleared the threshold — INCLUDING the classes that did not, so the spectrum has a shape and not only peaks
reportYesthe whole result, including the window corrections upstream raises as warnings
rSquaredYesgoodness of fit of the whole decomposition. Every percentage below is already scaled by it, so a low fit shrinks the classes rather than flagging them
breaksiteYesthe base the break was placed at, three bases 5-prime of the PAM. Every window in the result is positioned against it
efficiencyYestotal editing efficiency: the R-squared-scaled signal in every non-zero indel class, 0-100. Not the same quantity as an ICE score — wire them into a comparison rather than treating either as the number
aberrantSignalYesthe four means TIDE's own quality checklist is read from: control and sample, before and after the break. A sample already aberrant BEFORE the break is a sequencing problem rather than an edit, and this is the pair of numbers that says so
insertionBasesYesbase composition of the +1 insertion as percentages in A, C, G, T order — the readout ICE cannot produce. Null when there is no significant +1 class, which is the common case and not an error; `insertionNote` then says why in upstream’s own words
significantIndelsYesthe classes that cleared p_threshold, excluding the unmodified class — what a gate should read

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, non-destructive, closed read-only operation, so the bar is lower. The description adds the important modeling constraint that TIDE decomposes around a single break, but it does not cover failure modes (poor trace quality, off-target/noisy fits, what an underpowered window means) beyond what the schema descriptions already say.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the verb and method first, followed by an enumerated result set; there is essentially no filler. It is dense but readable, with mild redundancy since the output list largely duplicates the output schema.

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 an 11-parameter analysis tool with nested record objects and a full output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly: two traces, one guide, one break, and the reported quantities. The remaining advanced tuning is appropriately delegated to the parameter descriptions.

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 baseline is 3, and the description does slightly exceed it by framing the inputs semantically — 'pair of Sanger traces', the single-guide requirement, and that the control trace serves as the model. It still leaves the advanced knobs (window_start/end, max_shift, p_threshold) entirely to the schema.

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 names a specific verb (quantify) and resource (CRISPR edit via TIDE from a pair of Sanger traces) and lists the returned quantities, so the agent knows exactly what computation happens. It does not distinguish itself from near-siblings such as crispr_quantify_edits or detect_trace_indel, which keeps it out of 5 territory.

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 agent can infer this applies when it has a control and an edited Sanger trace plus a guide. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or pointer to the alternative tools (detect_trace_indel, crispr_quantify_edits, quantify_base_editing) that an agent would need to choose correctly.

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