Skip to main content
Glama
taehojo
by taehojo

predict_tissue_specific

Predicts how genetic variants affect gene regulation in specific tissues like brain, liver, and heart to identify tissue-specific disease mechanisms.

Instructions

Predict variant effects across multiple tissues.

Compares regulatory impact in different tissues to identify tissue-specific effects.

Default tissues: brain, liver, heart (customizable)

Returns impact levels and expression changes for each tissue.

Perfect for: understanding tissue-specific disease mechanisms, prioritizing relevant tissues.

Example: "Compare rs429358 effects in brain, liver, and heart"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chromosomeYesChromosome
positionYesGenomic position
refYesReference allele
altYesAlternate allele
tissuesNoList of tissues to test (default: brain, liver, heart)

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function implementing predict_tissue_specific tool logic: iterates over tissues, calls predict_variant_effect for each, aggregates tissue-specific impact results.
    def predict_tissue_specific(client, params: Dict[str, Any]) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Predict variant effects across multiple tissues.
        """
        tissues = params.get('tissues', ['brain', 'liver', 'heart'])
    
        results = {}
        for tissue in tissues:
            tissue_params = params.copy()
            tissue_params['tissue_type'] = tissue
            try:
                result = predict_variant_effect(client, tissue_params)
                results[tissue] = {
                    'expression_impact': result['predictions'].get('rna_seq', {}).get('fold_change', 0),
                    'splice_impact': result['predictions'].get('splice', {}).get('delta', 0),
                    'impact_level': result['interpretation']['impact_level']
                }
            except Exception as e:
                print(f"Warning: Failed to predict for tissue {tissue}: {e}", file=sys.stderr)
                results[tissue] = {'error': str(e)}
    
        return {
            'variant': f"{params.get('chromosome')}:{params.get('position')}{params.get('ref')}>{params.get('alt')}",
            'tissue_results': results
        }
  • Tool schema definition including name, description, and inputSchema for validation (chromosome, position, ref, alt, optional tissues).
    export const PREDICT_TISSUE_SPECIFIC_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: 'predict_tissue_specific',
      description: `Predict variant effects across multiple tissues.
    
    Compares regulatory impact in different tissues to identify tissue-specific effects.
    
    Default tissues: brain, liver, heart (customizable)
    
    Returns impact levels and expression changes for each tissue.
    
    Perfect for: understanding tissue-specific disease mechanisms, prioritizing relevant tissues.
    
    Example: "Compare rs429358 effects in brain, liver, and heart"`,
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          chromosome: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Chromosome',
            pattern: '^chr([1-9]|1[0-9]|2[0-2]|X|Y)$',
          },
          position: {
            type: 'number',
            description: 'Genomic position',
            minimum: 1,
          },
          ref: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Reference allele',
            pattern: '^[ATGCatgc]+$',
          },
          alt: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Alternate allele',
            pattern: '^[ATGCatgc]+$',
          },
          tissues: {
            type: 'array',
            items: {
              type: 'string',
            },
            description: 'List of tissues to test (default: brain, liver, heart)',
          },
        },
        required: ['chromosome', 'position', 'ref', 'alt'],
      },
    };
  • src/index.ts:154-158 (registration)
    MCP server handler registration: switch case dispatching to AlphaGenome client predictTissueSpecific method.
    case 'predict_tissue_specific': {
      const result = await getClient().predictTissueSpecific(args);
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
      };
  • src/tools.ts:709-730 (registration)
    Tool registration in ALL_TOOLS array export, including PREDICT_TISSUE_SPECIFIC_TOOL (line 713).
    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,
    ];
  • Python bridge dispatch: routes 'predict_tissue_specific' action to the handler function.
    elif action == 'predict_tissue_specific':
        result = predict_tissue_specific(client, params)
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it's a prediction/comparison tool (not a read or write operation), mentions default tissues and customizability, and describes what it returns ('impact levels and expression changes for each tissue'). However, it doesn't mention computational requirements, rate limits, or potential limitations of the predictions.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections: purpose, functionality, defaults, returns, use cases, and example. Each sentence adds value. It could be slightly more concise by combining some sentences, but overall it's efficiently written without wasted words.

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?

For a prediction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good context: clear purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral transparency about what it returns, and parameter context. The main gap is lack of output format details (what 'impact levels' and 'expression changes' look like structurally), but given the complexity is moderate and schema coverage is complete, this is reasonably comprehensive.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it mentions default tissues for the 'tissues' parameter and provides context about what the tool does with these parameters. This meets the baseline 3 when schema coverage is high.

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: 'Predict variant effects across multiple tissues' and 'Compares regulatory impact in different tissues to identify tissue-specific effects.' It uses specific verbs ('predict', 'compares', 'identify') and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on tissue-specific comparison rather than general variant analysis or other specific impacts like splicing or TF binding.

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 context for when to use this tool: 'Perfect for: understanding tissue-specific disease mechanisms, prioritizing relevant tissues.' It includes an example use case. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools for different scenarios.

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