Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gnomancer

gnomancer

by codebase
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

analyze

Process a raw consumer DNA file locally to generate Y/mtDNA haplogroups, traits, ClinVar and pharmacogenomics findings, plus a plain-language report without uploading it.

Instructions

Run gnomancer on a raw DNA file (AncestryDNA, 23andMe, MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA, LivingDNA, VCF; .zip OK). Takes one to three minutes; the very first run also downloads ~250 MB of open-source tools and references (a few minutes), automatically. fast=True skips Yleaf, ClinVar and PharmCAT. Returns the output directory, report paths and the at-a-glance digest. The file never leaves this machine.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "analyze"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fastNo
pathYes
out_dirNo
ancestryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the burden well: it discloses runtime (one to three minutes), a one-time ~250 MB download on first run, exactly what fast=True sacrifices, what is returned (output directory, report paths, digest), and that the file stays local. Remaining gaps are overwrite behavior when out_dir already exists and failure modes for unsupported/corrupt input files.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and accepted formats, then cost/time expectations, then flag behavior, then return values and the privacy guarantee. Five tight sentences with no filler; every clause conveys something an agent would otherwise have to guess.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description does the heavy lifting: it explains return values, duration, first-run download cost, and data locality. It is not fully complete for a four-parameter tool — ancestry goes undocumented and out_dir semantics and overwrite behavior are left implicit.

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 0%, so the description has to compensate for all four parameters. It explains path well (accepted formats, .zip allowed) and fast (what gets skipped), and hints at out_dir only indirectly via 'returns the output directory'. The ancestry boolean is never mentioned, leaving one of four parameters with no semantics anywhere.

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 — run gnomancer on a raw DNA file — and enumerates supported inputs (AncestryDNA, 23andMe, MyHeritage, FamilyTreeDNA, LivingDNA, VCF, .zip). This is plainly distinct from the sibling tools (lookup, summary, section), which read existing results rather than producing them.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The input-condition context is clear (raw DNA files of the listed formats) and the fast=True tradeoff (skips Yleaf, ClinVar and PharmCAT) tells the agent when the cheaper mode is appropriate. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent — e.g. saying this must be run before summary/section/lookup are usable, or when not to re-run on an already-processed directory.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools