tooluniverse-residue-functional-mechanism-interpretation

name

tooluniverse-residue-functional-mechanism-interpretation

description

Given a set of residues in a protein, explain WHY they are functionally critical by combining structural context (binding interface, ligand pocket, core, secondary structure), UniProt features (active sites, binding sites, PTM sites, disulfides), optional SAE feature evidence, and optional DMS data. Accepts residues from any source: DMS hotspots (top-K by max effect), ClinVar recurrent variants, literature-reported hot regions, evolutionarily conserved positions, or user-curated lists. Returns a per-cluster mechanism call: catalytic / ligand-binding / interface / structural-core / PTM / regulatory / unknown.

Residue functional mechanism interpretation

The core user question: "Why are these residues functionally critical?"

Answering needs more than one source: a residue in the ligand pocket means something different from one in a catalytic triad, an interface, the hydrophobic core, or a PTM sequon. This skill synthesizes evidence from multiple TU tools to call a mechanism for each residue (or cluster of adjacent residues).

The residues can come from any source — this skill is agnostic to where they came from:

Residue source	Typical call pattern
DMS map hotspots	Use Step 1 (optional) to detect top-K by max effect, then continue
ClinVar recurrent variants	Pull recurrent positions from ClinVar, pass directly as user_provided_positions
Literature hot regions	Paste positions from a paper's Fig 1, pass directly
Evolutionarily conserved residues	Filter by conservation score, pass top-N positions
Druggable site residues	From a binding-site predictor, pass directly
Clinician's question	"Why does mutation at R175 keep showing up in tumors?" — pass [175]

---

When to use this skill

• You have a list of residues (from anywhere) and need to explain why they matter biologically
• You're writing the methods/discussion section of a paper and need mechanistic claims per residue or cluster
• You're comparing residue sets across orthologs and need a per-residue category to align by

Not for:

• Validating a predictor against DMS — use tooluniverse-variant-predictor-dms-validation
• Single-variant SAE feature decomposition when you want to see which ESMC features changed — use tooluniverse-protein-sae-variant-interpretation
• Single-variant LoF mechanism synthesis for one variant in isolation — use tooluniverse-protein-lof-mechanism

The single-variant skills focus on one mutation's signature; this skill focuses on which residues matter and why.

---

Required inputs (choose one entry path)

Path A — Residues supplied directly (covers ClinVar / literature / custom positions):

Input	Notes
user_provided_positions: List[int]	1-based canonical residue positions
Protein metadata	UniProt accession + PDB ID + chain
(optional) DMS matrix	If supplied, used to enrich each cluster with effect-size context
(optional) SAE tensor	If supplied, gives SAE feature evidence as a 4th layer

Path B — Detect hotspots from a DMS map (original use case):

Input	Source	Notes
DMS effect matrix (20, n_positions)	MaveDB_get_effect_matrix	NaN for unmeasured
disruptive_tail	DMS retrieval metadata	"top" or "bottom"
Protein metadata	UniProt accession + PDB ID + chain	for the multi-evidence lookups
(optional) SAE evidence	ESM_get_region_sae_features for one contiguous cluster (1 Forge call), OR a precomputed full DMS SAE tensor from ESM_get_sae_features per mutant	the SAE evidence layer; see Step 4 for which path

In Path B the skill runs Step 1 to detect hotspots; in Path A it skips Step 1 entirely and goes straight to Step 2 (gather evidence).

---

Workflow

Step 0 (MANDATORY if user names specific positions): Premise check

If the user says "explain why residue/cluster X is a hotspot", do NOT take that as a given. Verify it's actually a hotspot in THIS DMS first — users import biological knowledge from other contexts that may not match what the specific assay measured.

# Per-position disruption magnitude (same formula as Step 1)
if disruptive_tail == "top":
    dms_per_pos = np.nanmax(dms_matrix, axis=0)
elif disruptive_tail == "bottom":
    dms_per_pos = -np.nanmin(dms_matrix, axis=0)

# Where do the user-named positions actually rank?
ranks = (-dms_per_pos).argsort().argsort()  # 0 = highest
for user_pos in user_named_positions:
    rank = int(ranks[pos_index[user_pos]])
    pct = 100 * (1 - rank / len(dms_per_pos))
    print(f"  pos {user_pos}: rank {rank+1}/{len(dms_per_pos)}, "
          f"top {pct:.0f}% by max effect")

Decision rule:

• If named position is in top 25% by max effect → premise confirmed, proceed.
• If named position is in top 50% but not 25% → premise weakly supported; proceed but note the rank in your report.
• If named position is below top 50% → REPORT THIS MISMATCH TRANSPARENTLY at the top of your answer before continuing with the mechanism analysis.

Concrete example: the user asks "why is KRAS G12/G13 a folding hotspot in this DMS?" The data say G12 ranks 105/187 (top 56%) and G13 ranks 124/187 (top 66%) by max ΔΔG — they are NOT folding hotspots in this AbundancePCA assay (even though they ARE famous oncogenic positions). The skill's job is to surface that contradiction up front, then proceed with a mechanism analysis for those residues (their oncogenic effect is via GTPase abolishment, not fold disruption — and that's a genuinely useful answer to the user's actual scientific question, just not the one they literally asked).

Step 1 (Path B only): Detect hotspots from the DMS matrix

Skip this step entirely if the user already provided positions (Path A). In Path A the residue list IS the input; jump straight to clustering at the bottom of this section.

import numpy as np

if user_provided_positions:
    # Path A — residues from any source (ClinVar / literature / custom)
    positions_to_analyze = sorted(set(user_provided_positions))
else:
    # Path B — detect from DMS matrix
    if disruptive_tail == "top":
        dms_per_pos = np.nanmax(dms_matrix, axis=0)   # max destabilization at any allele
    elif disruptive_tail == "bottom":
        dms_per_pos = -np.nanmin(dms_matrix, axis=0)  # flip for low-is-bad assays

    K = 20
    positions_to_analyze = sorted(np.argsort(-dms_per_pos)[:K].tolist())

# Chain adjacent positions (gap ≤ 2) into clusters — shared by both paths
clusters = []
current = [positions_to_analyze[0]]
for p in positions_to_analyze[1:]:
    if p - current[-1] <= 2:
        current.append(p)
    else:
        clusters.append(current)
        current = [p]
clusters.append(current)
print(f"{len(clusters)} cluster(s): {clusters}")

A "cluster" of one is allowed — it just gets less statistical power in the permutation test, but multi-evidence interpretation still works.

Path A workflow contracts (what's available vs not):

Evidence layer	Path A (user residues)	Path B (DMS hotspots)
Structural (Step 2)	✓ always	✓ always
UniProt features (Step 3)	✓ always	✓ always
SAE per-feature labels (Step 4, descriptive)	✓ if SAE tensor supplied	✓ if SAE tensor supplied
SAE permutation test (Step 4-alt)	✗ — needs DMS-derived max_drop baseline; not meaningful for residues with no DMS context	✓ if SAE tensor supplied
DMS effect-size context	✓ if DMS matrix supplied (enrichment only)	✓ always
Mechanism synthesis (Step 5)	✓ always	✓ always

Step 2: Gather structural evidence per cluster

Annotate the protein structure once, then read fields for each cluster's positions:

# One-shot structural annotation (cached for the rest of the skill)
struct = Structure_annotate_per_residue(
    pdb_id="6VJJ",                 # pick a structure with the relevant complex
    target_chain="A",
    partner_chains=["B"],          # if there's a binding partner
    ligand_resnames=["GNP", "MG"], # if there's a relevant ligand
    distance_cutoff=5.0,
    include_secondary_structure=True,
)
by_pos = {r["position"]: r for r in struct["data"]["annotations"]}

for cluster in clusters:
    structural_summary = {
        "interface_count": sum(1 for p in cluster if by_pos.get(p, {}).get("region") in ("interface", "both")),
        "ligand_pocket_count": sum(1 for p in cluster if by_pos.get(p, {}).get("region") in ("ligand", "both")),
        "core_count": sum(1 for p in cluster if by_pos.get(p, {}).get("is_core")),
        "ss_elements": [by_pos.get(p, {}).get("ss_element") for p  cluster],
    }

Step 3: Gather UniProt feature evidence per cluster

# UniProt features per position (active sites, binding sites, PTM sites, etc.)
up = UniProt_get_function_by_accession(accession="P01116")
# Parse up["features"] into a per-position lookup
features_by_pos = {}
for feat in up.get("features", []):
    start = int(feat.get("begin", feat.get("position", -1)))
    end = int(feat.get("end", start))
    for p in range(start, end + 1):
        features_by_pos.setdefault(p, []).append({
            "type": feat.get("type"),
            "description": feat.get("description", ""),
        })

for cluster in clusters:
    uniprot_summary = {
        "active_site": [p for p in cluster if any(f["type"] == "Active site" for f in features_by_pos.get(p, []))],
        "binding_site": [p for p in cluster if any(f["type"] == "Binding site" for f in features_by_pos.get(p, []))],
        "modified_residue": [p for p in cluster if any(f["type"] == "Modified residue"  f  features_by_pos.get(p, []))],
        : [p  p  cluster  (f[] ==   f  features_by_pos.get(p, []))],
        : [f.get()  p  cluster  f  features_by_pos.get(p, [])  f.get() == ],
    }

Step 4 (optional): Per-cluster SAE feature ranking

Two paths depending on whether you already have a full DMS SAE tensor:

Path A — no precomputed tensor (most cases): use the region tool directly. If the cluster is a contiguous range (or you can pad to one), ESM_get_region_sae_features aggregates SAE features over the range in a single Forge call:

region = ESM_get_region_sae_features(
    sequence=ref_sequence,
    start_position=min(cluster_positions),
    end_position=max(cluster_positions),
    top_k_features=5,
)
top_features = [f["feature_id"] for f in region["data"]["top_features"]]

This is the right default — 1 Forge call vs 20 × cluster-size for the DMS-tensor path. For non-contiguous clusters, run once per contiguous sub-range and union the top-K.

Path B — you already have a precomputed SAE tensor from a DMS sweep (e.g. the variant-predictor-dms-validation pipeline left one on disk): compute drops directly without re-calling Forge.

def cluster_sae_features(sae_tensor, wt_vec, cluster_positions, top_n=5):
    """Returns top SAE features by mean drop at cluster, ready for labeling."""
    drops = np.maximum(0.0, wt_vec[None, :, :] - sae_tensor)
    max_drop_per_pos = np.nanmax(drops, axis=0)  # (n_pos, 16384)
    cluster_mean = max_drop_per_pos[cluster_positions].mean(axis=0)
    return np.argsort(-cluster_mean)[:top_n].tolist()

top_features = cluster_sae_features(sae_tensor, wt_vec, cluster_cols, top_n=5)

Label each top feature via the SAE feature labeler:

for f in top_features:
    label = ESM_describe_sae_feature(feature_id=int(f), n_proteins=5)
    print(f"  feature {f}: {label['data'].get('category')} (conf {label['data'].get('confidence')})")

The first label call for each feature is slow (~30s, ~10 Forge credits as the labeler runs SAE on a 10-protein panel); subsequent calls hit cache.

Step 4-alt: permutation-test the SAE features (optional, more rigorous)

def permutation_pvalues(cluster_positions, max_drop, n_perm=10000, rng=None):
    """Per-feature: is the cluster's mean drop > random equally-sized set?"""
    rng = rng or np.random.default_rng(0)
    n_positions = max_drop.shape[0]
    cluster_size = len(cluster_positions)
    observed = max_drop[cluster_positions].mean(axis=0)
    null_geq = np.zeros(max_drop.shape[1], dtype=np.int32)
    for _ in range(n_perm):
        idx = rng.choice(n_positions, size=cluster_size, replace=False)
        null_geq += (max_drop[idx].mean(axis=0) >= observed).astype(np.int32)
    return (null_geq + 1) / (n_perm + 1)

from statsmodels.stats.multitest import multipletests
p_raw = permutation_pvalues(np.array(cluster_cols), max_drop_per_pos)
_, p_adj, _, _ = multipletests(p_raw, method="fdr_bh")
significant_features = np.where(p_adj < 0.05)[0].tolist()

Use the mean of max_drop, not the max — under this null a maximum-based statistic returns almost no significant features. Single-position clusters return no significant features (no statistical power) — fall back to Step 4 descriptive ranking.

Step 5: Synthesize the mechanism call

For each cluster, combine the 3 (or 4 with SAE) evidence streams:

def call_mechanism(structural, uniprot, sae_labels=None):
    """Return one of: catalytic | ligand-binding | interface |
    structural-core | PTM | regulatory | mixed | unknown."""

    # Direct UniProt evidence wins
    if uniprot["active_site"]:
        return "catalytic"
    if uniprot["binding_site"]:
        return "ligand-binding"
    if uniprot["modified_residue"] and len(uniprot["modified_residue"]) >= len(cluster) // 2:
        return "PTM"

    # Structural evidence
    if structural["ligand_pocket_count"] >= len(cluster) // 2:
        return "ligand-binding"
    if structural["interface_count"] >= len(cluster) // 2:
        return "interface"
    if structural["core_count"] >= len(cluster) // 2:
        return "structural-core"

    # SAE evidence as tiebreaker
    if sae_labels:
        from collections import Counter
        cat_counts = Counter(l for l in sae_labels  l)
         cat_counts:
            top_cat, n = cat_counts.most_common()[]
             n >= :  
                 top_cat  

     

Step 6: Report

Cluster 1 — positions [12, 13]
  Structural: 0/2 interface, 2/2 ligand pocket (GTP), 0/2 core, all in P-loop helix
  UniProt:    Binding site (GTP) at residues 12, 13
              Domain: small GTPase
  SAE top 5:  ligand-binding (×2), secondary-structure (×3)
  → MECHANISM: ligand-binding (GTP P-loop)

Cluster 2 — positions [40, 41]
  Structural: 2/2 interface (chain B = RAF1-RBD)
  UniProt:    no specific annotation
  SAE top 5:  structural-stability (×3), domain (×2)
  → MECHANISM: interface (KRAS-RAF1 binding)

Step 7: Visualize — annotated DMS heatmap with hotspot callouts

The publication-style figure: DMS effect heatmap, sequence strip, structural annotation track, with per-hotspot mechanism callouts above the heatmap.

Align everything to one position axis. Heatmap column p, sequence letter p, every annotation bar covering residue p — all share x = p. Verify a landmark before drawing:

landmark_col = positions.index(12)  # column for KRAS pos 12
assert sequence[landmark_col] == "G", f"alignment broken at col {landmark_col}"

A 1-2 residue misalignment between heatmap and annotation track is a common, visually subtle error. If you've cross-joined two coordinate systems and any join was off-by-N, the whole figure is silently wrong. Verify here.

Heatmap + sequence + annotation track + callouts:

import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np

vlim = max(abs(np.nanmin(dms_matrix)), abs(np.nanmax(dms_matrix)))

fig, axes = plt.subplots(
    nrows=4, ncols=1, figsize=(max(8, 0.15 * len(positions)), 6),
    gridspec_kw={"height_ratios": [0.5, 4, 0.3, 0.5]}, sharex=True,
)
ax_callouts, ax_heat, ax_seq, ax_anno = axes

# Heatmap — symmetric diverging (RdBu_r); center on 0 for ΔΔG-style data
im = ax_heat.imshow(
    dms_matrix, aspect="auto", cmap="RdBu_r",
    vmin=-vlim, vmax=vlim,
    extent=(0, len(positions), 20, 0),
)
ax_heat.set_yticks(np.arange(20) + 0.5)
ax_heat.set_yticklabels(list(amino_acid_order))
ax_heat.set_ylabel("Substitution")

# Mark WT cells (box, no fill) — distinguish "WT" from "not measured"
for col, p in enumerate(positions):
    wt_aa = sequence[col]
    if wt_aa in amino_acid_order:
        row = amino_acid_order.index(wt_aa)
        ax_heat.add_patch(plt.Rectangle(
            (col, row), 1, 1, fill=False, edgecolor='black', linewidth=0.5,
        ))

# Sequence strip — one monospace letter per column
ax_seq.set_xlim(0, (positions))
ax_seq.set_ylim(, )
ax_seq.set_yticks([])
 col, letter  (sequence):
    ax_seq.text(col + , , letter, ha=, va=,
                family=, fontsize=)


anno_by_pos = {a[]: a  a  struct[][]}
region_colors = {: , : ,
                 : , : }
 col, p  (positions):
    a = anno_by_pos.get(p, {})
    ax_anno.add_patch(plt.Rectangle(
        (col, ), , , facecolor=region_colors.get(a.get(, ), ),
    ))
     a.get():
        ax_anno.add_patch(plt.Rectangle((col, ), , , facecolor=))
ax_anno.set_xlim(, (positions))
ax_anno.set_ylim(, )
ax_anno.set_yticks([, ])
ax_anno.set_yticklabels([, ])
ax_anno.set_xlabel()


 cluster, mechanism, top_features  hotspot_results:
    cluster_cols = [positions.index(p)  p  cluster  p  positions]
      cluster_cols:
        
    c_left, c_right = (cluster_cols), (cluster_cols)
    center = (c_left + c_right) / 
    ax_heat.plot([c_left, c_right + ], [, ], , lw=)
    label_lines = [] + [  fl  top_features[:]]
    ax_callouts.text(center, , .join(label_lines),
                     ha=, va=, fontsize=,
                     bbox=(facecolor=, edgecolor=))
    ax_callouts.plot([center, center], [, -], , lw=)
ax_callouts.set_xlim(, (positions))
ax_callouts.set_ylim(, )
ax_callouts.axis()

fig.colorbar(im, ax=ax_heat, label=)
plt.savefig(, dpi=, bbox_inches=)

Three cell-color rules to get right:

• Real measurement → diverging colour
• WT cell → boxed (the black outline above), value-cell colour = centre
• Not measured → distinct colour (e.g. light grey, not white — white reads as "neutral" against the diverging palette)

Long proteins: for >300 residues, split into multiple horizontal panels (one panel per domain) rather than shrinking column width — the per-residue detail disappears below ~3 pixels per column.

Reproducing a published panel: verify its track alignment before treating it as ground truth. Published DMS panels do carry registration errors (the KRAS Fig 1i in the original paper is shifted +2 relative to its own sequence — see tooluniverse-protein-structural-annotation-pdb pitfalls).

---

Interpretation table — what the mechanism call means downstream

Mechanism	Implication
catalytic	Direct enzyme function — mutations abolish activity
ligand-binding	Substrate / cofactor / ion / nucleotide binding — mutations alter substrate specificity or affinity
interface	Protein-protein interaction surface — mutations may disrupt complex formation (consider PPI inhibitor design)
structural-core	Fold stability — mutations destabilize protein (consider rescuing with chaperones; harder to drug)
PTM	Regulation site (phospho, acetyl, ubiquitin, glycosylation) — mutations alter signaling rather than activity
regulatory	Allosteric site / autoinhibitory residue — mutations bias conformational equilibrium
mixed	Multiple evidence types disagree — needs case-by-case analysis
unknown	No mechanism could be assigned — possibly novel function or wrong reference structure

---

Honest limitations

1. Wrong PDB → wrong call. If your PDB doesn't include the relevant ligand or partner, the structural evidence layer is blind to that mechanism. Pick the structure that contains the right complex.
2. UniProt annotations are sparse for non-model proteins. Active sites are well-curated for canonical enzymes; novel proteins may have no annotated features and the skill falls back to structural + SAE only.
3. Single-position clusters limit statistical evidence. Descriptive ranking still works but permutation p-values can't (n=1).
4. SAE feature labels are interpretive hints, not ground truth. Labels come from how features activate across UniRef90, not per-protein expert curation. Treat "category: ligand-binding" as a hypothesis weight, not a proof.
5. Hotspots ≠ druggable sites. A catalytic residue is a critical residue but not necessarily a good drug target (allosteric pockets often are better). This skill explains why a residue is critical, not whether it's a good target.
6. The mechanism call is a synthesis of evidence, not a measurement. Don't quote the category as a fact — quote the evidence and the call as a reasoned conclusion.

---

Cross-references

Tool / Skill	Role
MaveDB_get_effect_matrix	DMS matrix input
tooluniverse-protein-structural-annotation-pdb (or Structure_annotate_per_residue directly)	Structural evidence
UniProt_get_function_by_accession	UniProt features (active sites, binding sites, PTMs, disulfides)
ESM_get_region_sae_features	Step 4 Path A — aggregate SAE features over a contiguous cluster in 1 Forge call (preferred)
ESM_get_sae_features	Step 4 Path B — only if you already have a precomputed full DMS SAE tensor
ESM_describe_sae_feature	Label SAE features in Step 4
tooluniverse-variant-predictor-dms-validation	Sibling skill: validate a predictor before trusting its scores
(heatmap visualization is now Step 7 of this skill)	annotated DMS panel with per-hotspot callouts
alphafold_get_prediction	pLDDT context if no experimental PDB available