Skip to main content
Glama
taehojo
by taehojo

explain_variant_impact

Translates technical genomic variant predictions into plain language for patient reports and non-technical summaries.

Instructions

Provide human-readable explanation of variant impact.

Translates technical predictions into plain language.

Perfect for: patient reports, non-technical summaries.

Example: "Explain the impact of chr9:12345678A>C in simple terms"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chromosomeYes
positionYes
refYes
altYes
tissue_typeNo

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function that generates human-readable explanation of variant impact by processing predictions from predict_variant_effect and constructing explanatory text based on impact level, RNA fold change, and splicing delta.
    def explain_variant_impact(client, params: Dict[str, Any]) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Provide human-readable explanation of variant impact."""
        result = predict_variant_effect(client, params)
    
        # Generate explanation
        predictions = result['predictions']
        impact = result['interpretation']['impact_level']
    
        explanation = []
    
        if impact == 'high':
            explanation.append("This variant has HIGH regulatory impact.")
        elif impact == 'moderate':
            explanation.append("This variant has MODERATE regulatory impact.")
        else:
            explanation.append("This variant has LOW regulatory impact.")
    
        rna_fc = predictions.get('rna_seq', {}).get('fold_change', 0)
        if abs(rna_fc) > 0.01:
            direction = "increases" if rna_fc > 0 else "decreases"
            explanation.append(f"It {direction} gene expression by {abs(rna_fc):.3f} fold.")
    
        splice_delta = predictions.get('splice', {}).get('delta', 0)
        if splice_delta > 0.1:
            explanation.append(f"It significantly affects splicing (delta: {splice_delta:.3f}).")
    
        return {
            'variant': result['variant'],
            'summary': ' '.join(explanation),
            'impact_level': impact,
            'clinical_significance': result['interpretation']['clinical_significance']
        }
  • Tool definition including name, description, and input schema (JSON Schema) for validating variant parameters: chromosome, position, ref, alt (tissue_type optional).
    export const EXPLAIN_VARIANT_IMPACT_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: 'explain_variant_impact',
      description: `Provide human-readable explanation of variant impact.
    
    Translates technical predictions into plain language.
    
    Perfect for: patient reports, non-technical summaries.
    
    Example: "Explain the impact of chr9:12345678A>C in simple terms"`,
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          chromosome: { type: 'string', pattern: '^chr([1-9]|1[0-9]|2[0-2]|X|Y)$' },
          position: { type: 'number', minimum: 1 },
          ref: { type: 'string', pattern: '^[ATGCatgc]+$' },
          alt: { type: 'string', pattern: '^[ATGCatgc]+$' },
          tissue_type: { type: 'string' },
        },
        required: ['chromosome', 'position', 'ref', 'alt'],
      },
    };
  • src/tools.ts:709-730 (registration)
    Registration of the explain_variant_impact tool as part of the complete ALL_TOOLS array exported for MCP server tool provision.
    export const ALL_TOOLS: Tool[] = [
      PREDICT_VARIANT_TOOL,
      BATCH_SCORE_TOOL,
      ASSESS_PATHOGENICITY_TOOL,
      PREDICT_TISSUE_SPECIFIC_TOOL,
      COMPARE_VARIANTS_TOOL,
      PREDICT_SPLICE_IMPACT_TOOL,
      PREDICT_EXPRESSION_IMPACT_TOOL,
      ANALYZE_GWAS_LOCUS_TOOL,
      COMPARE_ALLELES_TOOL,
      BATCH_TISSUE_COMPARISON_TOOL,
      PREDICT_TF_BINDING_IMPACT_TOOL,
      PREDICT_CHROMATIN_IMPACT_TOOL,
      COMPARE_PROTECTIVE_RISK_TOOL,
      BATCH_PATHOGENICITY_FILTER_TOOL,
      COMPARE_VARIANTS_SAME_GENE_TOOL,
      PREDICT_ALLELE_SPECIFIC_EFFECTS_TOOL,
      ANNOTATE_REGULATORY_CONTEXT_TOOL,
      BATCH_MODALITY_SCREEN_TOOL,
      GENERATE_VARIANT_REPORT_TOOL,
      EXPLAIN_VARIANT_IMPACT_TOOL,
    ];
  • MCP server tool call dispatcher that validates input using variantPredictionSchema and invokes the AlphaGenome client method.
    case 'explain_variant_impact': {
      const params = validateInput(variantPredictionSchema, args) as VariantPredictionParams;
      const result = await getClient().explainVariantImpact(params);
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
      };
    }
  • Client wrapper method that bridges the tool call to the Python bridge script by invoking callPythonBridge with action 'explain_variant_impact'.
    async explainVariantImpact(params: VariantPredictionParams): Promise<any> {
      try {
        return await this.callPythonBridge('explain_variant_impact', params);
      } catch (error) {
        if (error instanceof ApiError) throw error;
        throw new ApiError(`Variant impact explanation failed: ${error}`, 500);
      }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool provides 'human-readable explanation' and 'plain language' output, which gives some behavioral context about the output format. However, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, computational requirements, potential limitations, or error handling for invalid inputs.

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 perfectly concise and well-structured: purpose statement, elaboration, usage guidelines, and concrete example in just four sentences. Every sentence adds value, and the information is front-loaded with the core purpose first.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about the tool's purpose and usage but lacks sufficient detail about parameters, behavioral characteristics, and expected output format. The example helps but doesn't fully compensate for the missing structured information.

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

Parameters2/5

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. The example mentions 'chr9:12345678A>C' which hints at chromosome, position, ref, and alt parameters, but doesn't explain the tissue_type parameter or provide semantic meaning for any parameters beyond the basic example. The description adds minimal value beyond what the bare schema provides.

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 purpose: 'Provide human-readable explanation of variant impact' and 'Translates technical predictions into plain language.' It specifies the verb ('explain'), resource ('variant impact'), and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on explanation rather than analysis, prediction, or comparison.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly provides usage guidelines: 'Perfect for: patient reports, non-technical summaries.' It gives a clear context for when to use this tool (human-readable explanations for non-experts) versus when to use sibling tools like predict_* or analyze_* tools for technical analysis.

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/taehojo/alphagenome-mcp'

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