tooluniverse-binder-discovery

$npx mdskill add mims-harvard/ToolUniverse/tooluniverse-binder-discovery

Discover novel small-molecule binders for protein targets via virtual screening.

  • Solves hit identification and lead-finding before medicinal chemistry commitment.
  • Depends on 60+ ToolUniverse tools including ChEMBL, BindingDB, and ADMET filters.
  • Decides by combining structure-based and ligand-based screening with evidence grading.
  • Delivers prioritized candidates with rationale and synthesis feasibility in a report.

SKILL.md

.github/skills/tooluniverse-binder-discoveryView on GitHub ↗
---
name: tooluniverse-binder-discovery
description: Discover novel small-molecule binders for protein targets using structure-based and ligand-based screening. Covers druggability assessment, known-ligand mining (ChEMBL, BindingDB), similarity expansion, ADMET filtering, and synthesis feasibility. Use for hit identification, virtual screening, target-to-compounds workflows, and lead-finding before commit-to-medchem.
disable-model-invocation: true
---

# Small Molecule Binder Discovery Strategy

Systematic discovery of novel small molecule binders using 60+ ToolUniverse tools across druggability assessment, known ligand mining, similarity expansion, ADMET filtering, and synthesis feasibility.

**LOOK UP DON'T GUESS** - Always retrieve actual data from tools before drawing conclusions. Do not assume druggability, binding sites, or compound properties based on target class alone.

**KEY PRINCIPLES**:
1. **Report-first approach** - Create report file FIRST, then populate progressively
2. **Target validation FIRST** - Confirm druggability before compound searching
3. **Multi-strategy approach** - Combine structure-based and ligand-based methods
4. **ADMET-aware filtering** - Eliminate poor compounds early
5. **Evidence grading** - Grade candidates by supporting evidence
6. **Actionable output** - Provide prioritized candidates with rationale
7. **English-first queries** - Always use English terms in tool calls. Respond in the user's language

---

## Binding Site Reasoning (Start Here)

Before any tool call, reason about the target's structural biology:

**Is the binding site a well-defined pocket (small molecule accessible) or a flat protein-protein interface (needs peptide/macrocycle)?** This determines your screening strategy.

- **Enzymes with active sites** (proteases, kinases, ATPases): deep, well-defined pockets. Classic small molecule territory. Prioritize co-crystal structure search and known inhibitor scaffold analysis.
- **GPCRs and ion channels**: transmembrane pockets. Structure often available; start with GPCRdb and GtoPdb for known pharmacology.
- **Nuclear receptors**: deep hydrophobic pockets. Excellent small molecule tractability; ligand-based methods are well-powered.
- **Protein-protein interfaces**: flat, large contact surface. Small molecules rarely compete effectively unless there is a "hot spot" cavity. Check whether any allosteric pockets exist before committing to small molecule strategy. Warn the user if no pocket is found.
- **Intrinsically disordered regions**: essentially no small molecule approach. Redirect to peptide or degrader strategies.
- **Scaffolding / adaptor proteins**: assess co-crystal structures for unexpected pockets before declaring undruggable.

Use this reasoning to select phases and warn the user about challenges before executing a full workflow.

---

## Critical Workflow Requirements

### 1. Report-First Approach (MANDATORY)

**DO NOT** show search process or tool outputs to the user. Instead:

1. **Create the report file FIRST** - Before any data collection:
   - File name: `[TARGET]_binder_discovery_report.md`
   - Initialize with all section headers from the template (see REPORT_TEMPLATE.md)
   - Add placeholder text: `[Researching...]` in each section

2. **Progressively update the report** - As you gather data, update each section immediately.

3. **Output separate data files**:
   - `[TARGET]_candidate_compounds.csv` - Prioritized compounds with SMILES, scores
   - `[TARGET]_bibliography.json` - Literature references (optional)

### 2. Citation Requirements (MANDATORY)

Every piece of information MUST include its source:

Example: `*Source: ChEMBL via ChEMBL_get_target_activities (CHEMBL203)*`

---

## Workflow Overview

Phases in order:
- **Phase 0**: Tool verification (check parameter names with `get_tool_info`)
- **Phase 1**: Target validation — resolve IDs, assess druggability, identify binding sites, predict structure if needed
- **Phase 2**: Known ligand mining — ChEMBL, BindingDB, GtoPdb, PubChem BioAssay, chemical probes; SAR analysis
- **Phase 3**: Structure analysis — PDB co-crystals, EMDB (membrane targets), binding pocket characterization
- **Phase 3.5**: Docking validation — dock reference inhibitor to validate pocket geometry
- **Phase 4**: Compound expansion — similarity/substructure search (seeds: 3-5 diverse actives) + de novo generation
- **Phase 5**: ADMET filtering — physicochemical, bioavailability, toxicity, CYP, structural alerts
- **Phase 6**: Candidate docking and prioritization — score and rank top 20
- **Phase 6.5**: Literature evidence — PubMed, EuropePMC, OpenAlex
- **Phase 7**: Report synthesis and delivery

---

## Phase 0: Tool Verification

**CRITICAL**: Verify tool parameters before calling unfamiliar tools.

```python
tool_info = tu.tools.get_tool_info(tool_name="ChEMBL_get_target_activities")
```

Common parameter corrections (verify with `get_tool_info` if uncertain):
- `OpenTargets_*`: `ensemblId` (camelCase); `ADMETAI_*`: `smiles` must be a list
- `NvidiaNIM_alphafold2` *(requires NVIDIA_API_KEY env var; free key at build.nvidia.com)*: `sequence` not `seq`; `NvidiaNIM_genmol` *(requires NVIDIA_API_KEY env var; free key at build.nvidia.com)*: SMILES must contain `[*{min-max}]`
- `NvidiaNIM_boltz2` *(requires NVIDIA_API_KEY env var; free key at build.nvidia.com)*: `polymers=[{"molecule_type": "protein", "sequence": "..."}]`

---

## Phase 1: Target Validation

### 1.1 Identifier Resolution

Resolve all IDs upfront and store for downstream queries:

```
1. UniProt_search(query=target_name, organism="human") -> UniProt accession
2. MyGene_query_genes(q=gene_symbol, species="human") -> Ensembl gene ID
3. ChEMBL_search_targets(query=target_name, organism="Homo sapiens") -> ChEMBL target ID
4. GtoPdb_search_targets(query=target_name) -> GtoPdb ID (if GPCR/channel/enzyme)
```

### 1.2 Druggability Assessment

Use multi-source triangulation:
- `OpenTargets_get_target_tractability_by_ensemblID(ensemblId)` - tractability bucket
- `DGIdb_get_gene_druggability(genes=[gene_symbol])` - druggability categories
- `OpenTargets_get_target_classes_by_ensemblID(ensemblId)` - target class
- For GPCRs: `GPCRdb_get_protein` + `GPCRdb_get_ligands` + `GPCRdb_get_structures`
- For antibody landscape: `TheraSAbDab_search_by_target(target=target_name)`

**Decision Point**: If no tractability data and binding site reasoning suggests PPI or disordered region, explicitly warn the user before proceeding.

### 1.3 Binding Site Analysis

- `ChEMBL_search_binding_sites(target_chembl_id)`
- `get_binding_affinity_by_pdb_id(pdb_id)` for co-crystallized ligands
- `InterPro_get_protein_domains(accession)` for domain architecture

### 1.4 Structure Prediction (NVIDIA NIM)

Requires `NVIDIA_API_KEY`. Two options:
- **AlphaFold2**: `NvidiaNIM_alphafold2(sequence, algorithm="mmseqs2")` - high accuracy, 5-15 min
- **ESMFold**: `ESMFold_predict_structure(sequence)` - fast (~30s), max 1024 AA

pLDDT guidance: >=90 very high confidence, 70-90 confident, <70 use with caution. Low pLDDT in the putative binding region undermines docking reliability.

---

## Phase 2: Known Ligand Mining

Priority order for bioactivity data:
1. `ChEMBL_get_target_activities` - curated, SAR-ready
2. `BindingDB_get_ligands_by_uniprot` - direct Ki/Kd with literature links
3. `GtoPdb_search_ligands` - pharmacology focus (GPCRs, channels)
4. `PubChem_search_assays_by_target_gene` - HTS screens, novel scaffolds
5. `OpenTargets_get_chemical_probes_by_target_ensemblID` - validated probes

Key steps:
1. Filter to IC50/Ki/Kd < 10 uM; retrieve molecule details for top actives
2. Identify chemical probes and approved drugs
3. Analyze SAR: common scaffolds, key modifications
4. Check off-target selectivity: `BindingDB_get_targets_by_compound`

---

## Phase 3: Structure Analysis

Tools:
- `PDB_search_similar_structures(query=uniprot, type="sequence")` - find PDB entries
- `get_protein_metadata_by_pdb_id(pdb_id)` - resolution, method
- `get_binding_affinity_by_pdb_id(pdb_id)` - co-crystal ligand affinities
- `get_ligand_smiles_by_chem_comp_id(chem_comp_id)` - ligand SMILES from PDB
- `EMDB_search_structures(query)` - cryo-EM structures (prefer for GPCRs, ion channels)
- `alphafold_get_prediction(qualifier)` - AlphaFold DB fallback

### Phase 3.5: Docking Validation (NVIDIA NIM)

If PDB + SDF available: use `get_diffdock_info(protein=PDB, ligand=SDF, num_poses=10)`.
If only sequence + SMILES: use `NvidiaNIM_boltz2(polymers=[...], ligands=[...])`.

Dock a known reference inhibitor first to validate the binding pocket geometry before running candidates.

---

## Phase 4: Compound Expansion

### 4.1-4.3 Search-Based Expansion

Use 3-5 diverse actives as seeds, similarity threshold 70-85%:
- `ChEMBL_search_similar_molecules(molecule=SMILES, similarity=70)`
- `PubChem_search_compounds_by_similarity(smiles, threshold=0.7)`
- `ChEMBL_search_substructure(smiles=core_scaffold)`
- `STITCH_get_chemical_protein_interactions(identifier=gene, species=9606)`

### 4.4 De Novo Generation (NVIDIA NIM)

**GenMol** - scaffold hopping with masked regions:
```
NvidiaNIM_genmol(smiles="...core...[*{3-8}]...tail...[*{1-3}]...", num_molecules=100, temperature=2.0, scoring="QED")
```

**MolMIM** - controlled analog generation:
```
NvidiaNIM_molmim(smi=reference_smiles, num_molecules=50, algorithm="CMA-ES")
```

---

## Phase 5: ADMET Filtering

Apply sequentially (all tools accept `smiles=[list]`):

1. **Physicochemical**: `ADMETAI_predict_physicochemical_properties` - Lipinski violations <= 1, QED > 0.3, MW 200-600
2. **Bioavailability**: `ADMETAI_predict_bioavailability` - oral bioavailability > 0.3
3. **Toxicity**: `ADMETAI_predict_toxicity` - AMES < 0.5, hERG < 0.5, DILI < 0.5
4. **CYP**: `ADMETAI_predict_CYP_interactions` - flag CYP3A4 inhibitors
5. **Alerts**: `ChEMBL_search_compound_structural_alerts` - no PAINS

Include a filter funnel summary in the report showing pass/fail counts at each stage.

---

## Phase 6: Candidate Docking & Prioritization

Composite score: docking confidence (40%) + ADMET score (30%) + similarity to known active (20%) + novelty (10%, not in ChEMBL + novel scaffold bonus).

Evidence tiers for candidates:
- T1 (3 stars): Experimental IC50/Ki < 100 nM
- T2 (2 stars): Docking within 5% of reference OR IC50 100-1000 nM
- T3 (1 star): >80% similarity to T1 compound
- T4 (0 stars): 70-80% similarity, scaffold match only
- T5 (no stars): Generated molecule, ADMET-passed, no docking

Deliver top 20 candidates with: Rank, ID, SMILES, docking score, ADMET score, overall score, source, evidence tier.

---

## Phase 6.5: Literature Evidence

- `PubMed_search_articles(query="[TARGET] inhibitor SAR")` - peer-reviewed
- `EuropePMC_search_articles(query, source="PPR")` - preprints (not peer-reviewed)
- `openalex_search_works(query)` - citation analysis

---

## Fallback Chains

```
Target ID:     ChEMBL_search_targets -> GtoPdb_search_targets -> "Not in databases"
Druggability:  OpenTargets tractability -> DGIdb druggability -> target class proxy
Bioactivity:   ChEMBL -> BindingDB -> GtoPdb -> PubChem BioAssay -> "No data"
Structure:     PDB -> EMDB (membrane) -> alphafold_get_prediction -> NvidiaNIM_esmfold -> AlphaFold DB -> "None"
Similarity:    ChEMBL similar -> PubChem similar -> "Search failed"
Docking:       get_diffdock_info -> NvidiaNIM_boltz2 -> similarity-based scoring
Generation:    NvidiaNIM_genmol -> NvidiaNIM_molmim -> similarity search only
Literature:    PubMed -> EuropePMC (preprints) -> OpenAlex
GPCR data:     GPCRdb_get_protein -> GtoPdb_search_targets
```

---

## Programmatic Access (Beyond Tools)

When ToolUniverse tools return limited compound sets, access chemical databases directly:

```python
import requests, pandas as pd

# PubChem batch property retrieval (up to 100 CIDs per call)
cids = "2244,5988,3672"
url = f"https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/rest/pug/compound/cid/{cids}/property/MolecularWeight,XLogP,TPSA,HBondDonorCount,HBondAcceptorCount/JSON"
props = pd.DataFrame(requests.get(url).json()["PropertyTable"]["Properties"])

# ChEMBL bioactivity bulk download for a target
target_id = "CHEMBL203"  # EGFR
url = f"https://www.ebi.ac.uk/chembl/api/data/activity.json?target_chembl_id={target_id}&pchembl_value__gte=5&limit=1000"
activities = requests.get(url).json()["activities"]
df = pd.DataFrame(activities)[["molecule_chembl_id", "canonical_smiles", "pchembl_value", "standard_type"]]

# Lipinski Rule of 5 filtering (no RDKit needed)
lipinski = props[(props["MolecularWeight"] <= 500) & (props["XLogP"] <= 5) &
                 (props["HBondDonorCount"] <= 5) & (props["HBondAcceptorCount"] <= 10)]

# SDF download from PubChem (for docking input)
sdf_url = f"https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/rest/pug/compound/cid/{cids}/SDF"
sdf_content = requests.get(sdf_url).text
```

See `tooluniverse-data-wrangling` skill for format cookbook and pagination patterns.

---

## NVIDIA NIM Runtime Notes

AlphaFold2: 5-15 min (async, max ~2000 AA). ESMFold: ~30 sec (max 1024 AA). DiffDock: ~1-2 min/ligand. Boltz2: ~2-5 min. GenMol/MolMIM: ~1-3 min.

Always check: `import os; nvidia_available = bool(os.environ.get("NVIDIA_API_KEY"))`

For large expansions (>500 compounds): batch in chunks of 100, prioritize top candidates for docking.

---

## Reference Files

- [WORKFLOW_DETAILS.md](./WORKFLOW_DETAILS.md) - Phase-by-phase procedures, code patterns, screening protocols
- [TOOLS_REFERENCE.md](./TOOLS_REFERENCE.md) - Complete tool reference with parameters and fallback chains
- [REPORT_TEMPLATE.md](./REPORT_TEMPLATE.md) - Report file template and evidence grading system
- [EXAMPLES.md](./EXAMPLES.md) - End-to-end workflow examples (EGFR, novel target, lead optimization)
- [CHECKLIST.md](./CHECKLIST.md) - Pre-delivery verification checklist

More from mims-harvard/ToolUniverse

SkillDescription
create-tooluniverse-skillCreate high-quality ToolUniverse skills following test-driven, implementation-agnostic methodology.
devtu-auto-discover-apisAutomatically discover life science APIs online, create ToolUniverse tools, validate them, and prepare integration PRs. Performs gap analysis to identify missing tool categories, web searches for APIs, automated tool creation using devtu-create-tool patterns, validation with devtu-fix-tool, and git workflow management. Use when expanding ToolUniverse coverage, adding new API integrations, or systematically discovering scientific resources.
devtu-benchmark-harnessContinuous improvement system for ToolUniverse tools, skills, and plugin. Run benchmarks, diagnose failures, route fixes to devtu skills, retest. Use after skill optimization, tool additions, or as regression check.
devtu-code-optimization>
devtu-create-toolCreate new scientific tools for ToolUniverse framework with proper structure, validation, and testing. Use when users need to add tools to ToolUniverse, implement new API integrations, create tool wrappers for scientific databases/services, expand ToolUniverse capabilities, or follow ToolUniverse contribution guidelines. Supports creating tool classes, JSON configurations, validation, error handling, and test examples.
devtu-docs-qualityTOP PRIORITY skill — find and immediately fix or remove every piece of wrong, outdated, or redundant information in ToolUniverse docs. Wrong code, broken links, incorrect counts, and overlapping instructions must be fixed or removed — never left in place. Runs five phases: (D) static method scan, (C) live code execution, (A) automated validation, (B) ToolUniverse audit, (E) less-is-more simplification. Core philosophy: each concept appears exactly once; remove don't add; no emojis; single setup entry point. Use when reviewing docs, before releases, after API changes, or when asked to audit, fix, or simplify documentation.
devtu-fix-toolFix failing ToolUniverse tools by diagnosing test failures, identifying root causes, implementing fixes, and validating solutions. Use when ToolUniverse tools fail tests, return errors, have schema validation issues, or when asked to debug or fix tools in the ToolUniverse framework.
devtu-githubGitHub workflow for ToolUniverse - push code safely by moving temp files, activating pre-commit hooks, running tests, and cleaning staged files. Use when pushing to GitHub, fixing CI failures, or cleaning up before commits.
devtu-optimize-descriptionsOptimize tool descriptions in ToolUniverse JSON configs for clarity and usability. Reviews descriptions for missing prerequisites, unexpanded abbreviations, unclear parameters, and missing usage guidance. Use when reviewing tool descriptions, improving API documentation, or when user asks to check if tools are easy to understand.
devtu-optimize-skillsOptimize ToolUniverse skills for better report quality, evidence handling, and user experience. Apply patterns like tool verification, foundation data layers, disambiguation-first, evidence grading, quantified completeness, and report-only output. Use when reviewing skills, improving existing skills, or creating new ToolUniverse research skills.