Skip to main content
Glama

get_embedding_layers

Retrieve available embedding layers from Evo 2 models, with curated recommendations for downstream tasks like classification and interpretation.

Instructions

Get available layers for embedding extraction from Evo 2 model.

Returns a list of layer names that can be used to extract sequence embeddings from the specified Evo 2 checkpoint. Different layers encode varying levels of biological abstraction. Larger models tend to have more nuanced representations but require more computational resources. For supervised classification tasks (e.g., variant effect prediction), intermediate layers like Block 20 (40B model) often perform best. For mechanistic interpretability (e.g., SAE training), deeper layers like Layer 26 are commonly used. For probing tasks, top-level layers (e.g., blocks.26 in 7B model) may be optimal.

Args: checkpoint: Model checkpoint identifier. See list_available_checkpoints() for options. which: Selection switch. "recommended" returns a curated subset of layers suitable for common downstream tasks; "all" returns every available layer from the model.

Returns: Dictionary containing: - checkpoint: The checkpoint identifier - layers: List of layer names available for embedding extraction - info: Information about layer selection for different tasks

Example: >>> layers = get_embedding_layers("evo2_7b") >>> print(f"Layers (recommended): {layers['layers']}") >>> layers_all = get_embedding_layers("evo2_7b", which="all") >>> print(f"Total layers: {len(layers_all['layers'])}")

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
whichNorecommended
checkpointYes

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, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavioral difference between 'recommended' and 'all' selections, describes the return structure, and includes an example. While it doesn't mention potential errors or side effects, it is a read-only lookup and the behavioral detail provided is substantial.

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 Args, Returns, and Example sections. It is concise yet informative, with each section adding value. The front-loaded purpose statement is clear, and the detailed layer guidance is relevant and earns its place.

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 tool has two parameters and an output schema, but the description still adds value by explaining return keys, providing an example, and offering layer-selection advice. It is complete enough for an AI agent to understand the tool's purpose, usage, and expected output without additional context.

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 must compensate. It provides thorough explanations for both parameters: checkpoint and which, detailing what 'recommended' and 'all' return. It also gives a concrete example demonstrating usage, adding significant meaning 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get available layers for embedding extraction from Evo 2 model.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings like embed_sequence (which likely performs extraction) and list_available_checkpoints (which lists checkpoints).

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 description provides clear usage context, including guidance on which layers to use for different tasks (e.g., intermediate layers for classification, deeper layers for interpretability). It also references list_available_checkpoints() for parameter options. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or direct alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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