Skip to main content
Glama

score_sequence

Compute log probabilities for a DNA sequence using the Evo 2 model. Returns the model's likelihood score for the sequence with mean or sum aggregation.

Instructions

Compute log probabilities for DNA sequence under Evo 2 model.

Evaluates the likelihood of a DNA sequence under the Evo 2 language model. Returns the model's log probability score for the entire sequence, which can be reduced using either mean or sum aggregation.

Args: sequence: DNA sequence to score. Should contain standard IUPAC nucleotides (A, C, G, T, N). checkpoint: Model checkpoint identifier. If None, uses the default checkpoint. See list_available_checkpoints() for available options. reduce_method: Method for aggregating per-token scores. Must be either "mean" (average log probability across all tokens) or "sum" (sum of all log probabilities).

Returns: Dictionary containing: - checkpoint: The checkpoint identifier used - sequence: The normalized input sequence - reduce_method: The reduction method applied - scores: List of computed score values (typically length 1)

Raises: AssertionError: If sequence is empty or reduce_method is not "mean" or "sum".

Example: >>> scores = score_sequence("ATCGATCG") >>> print(f"Score: {scores['scores'][0]}")

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sequenceYes
checkpointNo
reduce_methodNomean

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, description carries full burden and mostly delivers: raises AssertionError for invalid inputs, returns a structured dictionary with normalized sequence and scores list, includes example. Slight gaps: log base unspecified, normalization details vague, error cases for invalid checkpoints not disclosed.

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?

Well-structured with Purpose, Args, Returns, Raises, Example. The front-loaded purpose is clear, and each section adds value. Slightly verbose but every part is informative for a non-trivial tool.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description needn't cover return values, yet it does. It covers all parameter semantics and typical errors. Missing explicit differentiation from score_snp and broader error handling, but overall a complete self-contained description for the core use case.

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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage). Description's Args section thoroughly explains all three parameters, including semantics, defaults, and constraints (e.g., reduce_method must be 'mean'/'sum'). Fully compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Clear and specific: 'Compute log probabilities for DNA sequence under Evo 2 model.' Distinct from siblings like embed_sequence (embeddings) and generate_sequence (generation); the verb+resource precisely identifies the scoring operation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

Provides detailed parameter intent but no guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives. Sibling score_snp likely serves a different variant-scoring purpose but is never mentioned. No when-not-to-use or alternate tool references.

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