Skip to main content
Glama

embed_sequence

Extract intermediate Evo 2 embeddings from a DNA sequence for downstream analysis using layer-specific feature representations.

Instructions

Return intermediate Evo 2 embeddings for DNA sequence.

Extracts feature representations from a specified layer of the Evo 2 model for a given DNA sequence. The embeddings capture the model's learned representations and can be used for downstream analysis or as features for other tasks.

Args: sequence: DNA sequence to embed. Should contain standard IUPAC nucleotides (A, C, G, T). checkpoint: Model checkpoint identifier. If None, uses the default checkpoint. See list_available_checkpoints() for available options. layer_name: Name of the model layer from which to extract embeddings. Common choices include intermediate MLP layers and attention blocks.

Returns: Dictionary containing: - checkpoint: The checkpoint identifier used - sequence: The normalized input sequence - layer_name: The layer from which embeddings were extracted - embedding: 2D list of embedding vectors (shape: [sequence_length, embedding_dim])

Raises: AssertionError: If sequence or layer_name are empty strings.

Example: >>> embeddings = embed_sequence("ATCGATCG") >>> embedding_matrix = embeddings["embedding"] >>> print(f"Embedding shape: {len(embedding_matrix)} tokens")

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sequenceYes
checkpointNo
layer_nameNoblocks.2.mlp.l3

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses output structure (dict with keys), normalization of the input sequence, raises AssertionError for empty strings, and notes the default checkpoint behavior. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, but the passive 'Return' and 'Extracts' imply pure computation.

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?

The description is well-structured with a lead sentence, Args, Returns, Raises, and Example. All sections earn their place; the only slightly redundant sentence about downstream analysis is brief and adds context. No wasted words.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description fully covers parameters, return values, error conditions, and includes a concrete example. It even references a sibling tool for checkpoint options, making it complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description provides essential meaning for all three parameters: sequence validity (IUPAC nucleotides), checkpoint selection (default and alternative listing), and layer_name (common layer choices). This goes far beyond the bare schema.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Return intermediate Evo 2 embeddings for DNA sequence.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like score_sequence and generate_sequence by stating it extracts feature representations from a specified layer.

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 usage for downstream analysis and references list_available_checkpoints() for checkpoint selection, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like score_sequence or generate_sequence. There are no exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/not-a-feature/evo2-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server