Bindcraft
Claude Code skills for protein design
npx -y skills add adaptyvbio/protein-design-skills --skill bindcraftAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
End-to-end binder design using BindCraft hallucination. Use this skill when: (1) Designing protein binders with built-in AF2 validation, (2) Running production-quality binder campaigns, (3) Using different design protocols (fast, default, slow), (4) Need joint backbone and sequence optimization, (5) Want high experimental success rate. For backbone-only generation, use rfdiffusion. For QC thresholds, use protein-qc. For tool selection guidance, use binder-design.
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
5.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
BindCraft Binder Design
Prerequisites
| Requirement | Minimum | Recommended |
|---|---|---|
| Python | 3.9+ | 3.10 |
| CUDA | 11.7+ | 12.0+ |
| GPU VRAM | 32GB | 48GB (L40S) |
| RAM | 32GB | 64GB |
How to run
First time? See Getting started to set up Modal and biomodals.
Option 1: Modal (recommended)
cd biomodals
modal run modal_bindcraft.py \
--input-pdb target.pdb \
--target-chains A \
--target-hotspot-residues "45,67,89" \
--lengths "70,100" \
--number-of-final-designs 50
GPU: L40S (48GB) | Timeout: 300 min default
Option 2: Local installation
git clone https://github.com/martinpacesa/BindCraft.git
cd BindCraft
# BindCraft is configured with JSON files, not flags
python -u ./bindcraft.py \
--settings ./settings_target/mytarget.json \
--filters ./settings_filters/default_filters.json \
--advanced ./settings_advanced/default_4stage_multimer.json
The target PDB, chains, hotspots, and binder length range are set inside the
--settings JSON. See the BindCraft repo for the settings schema.
Key parameters (Modal wrapper)
| Parameter | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
--input-pdb | required | Target structure |
--target-chains | A | Target chain(s) |
--target-hotspot-residues | "" | Target hotspots (e.g. "45,67,89") |
--lengths | 50,130 | Binder length range |
--number-of-final-designs | 1 | Passing designs to return |
--max-trajectories | none | Cap on trajectories |
Output format
output/
├── design_0/
│ ├── binder.pdb # Final design
│ ├── complex.pdb # Binder + target
│ ├── metrics.json # QC scores
│ └── trajectory/ # Optimization trajectory
├── design_1/
│ └── ...
└── summary.csv # All metrics
Metrics Output
{
"plddt": 0.89,
"ptm": 0.78,
"iptm": 0.62,
"pae": 8.5,
"rmsd": 1.2,
"sequence": "MKTAYIAK..."
}
Sample output
Successful run
$ modal run modal_bindcraft.py --input-pdb target.pdb --target-chains A --target-hotspot-residues "45,67,89" --number-of-final-designs 50
[INFO] Loading BindCraft model...
[INFO] Target: target.pdb (chain A)
[INFO] Hotspots: 45, 67, 89
[INFO] Generating designs...
Design 1/50:
Length: 78 AA
pLDDT: 0.89, ipTM: 0.62
Saved: output/design_0/
Design 50/50:
Length: 85 AA
pLDDT: 0.86, ipTM: 0.58
Saved: output/design_49/
[INFO] Campaign complete. Summary: output/summary.csv
Pass rate: 32/50 (64%) with ipTM > 0.5
What good output looks like:
- pLDDT: > 0.85 for most designs
- ipTM: > 0.5 for passing designs
- Pass rate: 30-70% depending on target
- Diverse sequences across designs
Decision tree
Should I use BindCraft?
│
├─ What type of design?
│ ├─ Production-quality binders → BindCraft ✓
│ ├─ High diversity exploration → RFdiffusion
│ └─ All-atom precision → BoltzGen
│
├─ What matters most?
│ ├─ Experimental success rate → BindCraft ✓
│ ├─ Speed / diversity → RFdiffusion + ProteinMPNN
│ ├─ AF2 gradient optimization → ColabDesign
│ └─ All-atom control → BoltzGen
│
└─ Compute resources?
├─ Have L40S/A100 → BindCraft ✓
└─ Only A10G → RFdiffusion + ProteinMPNN
Typical performance
| Campaign Size | Time (L40S) | Cost (Modal) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 50 designs | 2-4h | ~$15 | Quick campaign |
| 100 designs | 4-8h | ~$30 | Standard |
| 200 designs | 8-16h | ~$60 | Large campaign |
Adaptyv's own tests of these models showed BindCraft costing about $2.90 per accepted design, averaged across 7 targets.
Experimental success rate (BindCraft paper): 10 to 100%, averaging 46.3% across 12 targets; strongly target-dependent.
Verify
find output -name "binder.pdb" | wc -l # Should match num_designs
Troubleshooting
Low ipTM scores: Check hotspot selection, increase designs Slow convergence: Use fast protocol for screening OOM errors: Reduce num_models, use L40S GPU Poor diversity: Lower sampling_temp, run multiple seeds
Error interpretation
| Error | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
RuntimeError: CUDA out of memory | Large target or long binder | Use L40S/A100, reduce binder length |
ValueError: no hotspots | Hotspots not found | Check residue numbering |
TimeoutError | Design taking too long | Use fast protocol |
Next: Rank by ipsae → experimental validation.