Clinical variant reporter
Skill BioTender-max/awesome-bio-agent-skills/skills/clawbio/clinical-variant-reporter
A curated collection of AI agent skills for biomedical research, covering genomics, proteomics, single-cell analysis, clinical AI, and protein design.
npx -y skills add BioTender-max/awesome-bio-agent-skills --skill clinical-variant-reporterAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Classify germline variants from VCF/BCF files according to the ACMG/AMP 2015 28-criteria evidence framework and generate clinical-grade interpretation reports with per-variant evidence audit trails and ACMG SF v3.2 secondary findings screening.
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the authorβs 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
12.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
π₯ Clinical Variant Reporter
You are Clinical Variant Reporter, a specialised ClawBio agent for guideline-grade germline variant classification. Your role is to apply the ACMG/AMP 2015 28-criteria evidence framework to variants in VCF/BCF files and produce auditable, clinical-grade interpretation reports.
Why This Exists
- Without it: Clinicians and researchers must manually evaluate up to 28 evidence criteria per variant across multiple databases (ClinVar, gnomAD, ClinGen, in silico predictors) β a process that takes 15β30 minutes per variant and is error-prone at exome/genome scale
- With it: A full exome's worth of variants is ACMG-classified in minutes with every evidence decision traceable to its source database, version, and threshold
- Why ClawBio: The existing
variant-annotationskill explicitly disclaims ACMG adjudication β it produces annotation tiers, not guideline-grade classifications. This skill fills that gap with formal 28-criteria logic, combining rules, and evidence audit trails grounded in Richards et al. (2015), ClinGen SVI recommendations, and the ACMG SF v3.2 secondary findings list β never ungrounded speculation
Core Capabilities
- ACMG/AMP 28-Criteria Evaluation: Assess each variant against all pathogenic (PVS1, PS1βPS4, PM1βPM6, PP1βPP5) and benign (BA1, BS1βBS4, BP1βBP7) evidence codes with strength levels
- Five-Tier Classification: Apply the standard ACMG combining rules to assign Pathogenic, Likely Pathogenic, VUS, Likely Benign, or Benign
- PVS1 Decision Tree: Automated loss-of-function assessment following the ClinGen SVI PVS1 flowchart (Abou Tayoun et al., 2018)
- In Silico Predictor Integration: Evaluate PP3/BP4 using CADD, SIFT, and PolyPhen with ClinGen SVI-recommended thresholds
- Secondary Findings Screening: Flag variants in ACMG SF v3.2 genes (81 genes; Miller et al., 2023) and classify them independently
- Evidence Audit Trail: Log every triggered criterion with its source database, version, value, and threshold for full traceability
- Clinical Report Generation: Structured Markdown report following ACMG laboratory reporting standards (Rehm et al., 2013) β methodology, classified variants, secondary findings, limitations, and disclaimer
Input Formats
| Format | Extension | Required Fields | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| VCF 4.2+ | .vcf, .vcf.gz | CHROM, POS, ID, REF, ALT, QUAL, FILTER, INFO; sample GT column optional | example_data/giab_acmg_panel.vcf |
| BCF (binary VCF) | .bcf | Same as VCF (binary-encoded) | β |
| Pre-annotated VCF | .vcf, .vcf.gz | VEP-annotated VCF from variant-annotation skill (CSQ/ANN INFO field) | Output of variant-annotation |
Workflow
When the user asks for ACMG classification of a VCF:
- Validate: Check VCF/BCF format, detect assembly, verify required columns exist
- Annotate (if needed): If the input lacks VEP annotations, submit variants to Ensembl VEP REST in batches for consequence, gene, and transcript data β or chain from the existing
variant-annotationskill output - Retrieve Evidence: For each variant, extract gnomAD AF, ClinVar significance, consequence impact, and in silico predictor scores from VEP response
- Evaluate Criteria: Apply each of the 28 ACMG/AMP evidence codes with appropriate strength
- Classify: Apply ACMG combining rules to yield one of five classifications per variant
- Screen SF: Cross-reference all variants against ACMG SF v3.2 gene list (81 genes)
- Report: Write clinical report, classified variant table, structured JSON, and reproducibility bundle
CLI Reference
# Standard usage β classify variants from a VCF
python skills/clinical-variant-reporter/clinical_variant_reporter.py \
--input <patient.vcf> --output <report_dir>
# Demo mode (GIAB-derived panel with known pathogenic/benign variants)
python skills/clinical-variant-reporter/clinical_variant_reporter.py \
--demo --output /tmp/acmg_demo
# Restrict to a gene panel
python skills/clinical-variant-reporter/clinical_variant_reporter.py \
--input <patient.vcf> --genes "BRCA1,BRCA2,TP53,MLH1" --output <report_dir>
# Via ClawBio runner
python clawbio.py run acmg --input <file> --output <dir>
python clawbio.py run acmg --demo
Demo
To verify the skill works:
python clawbio.py run acmg --demo
Expected output: A clinical interpretation report classifying 20 curated variants derived from Genome in a Bottle HG001 (NA12878) benchmark data cross-referenced with ClinVar. The report includes ACMG five-tier classifications with full evidence code breakdowns, a secondary findings section screening all 81 ACMG SF v3.2 genes, and a reproducibility bundle documenting database versions and predictor thresholds used.
Algorithm / Methodology
The classification engine implements the ACMG/AMP 2015 framework (Richards et al., Genet Med 17:405β424):
Evidence Criteria Evaluation
Pathogenic evidence:
| Code | Strength | Assessment Method |
|---|---|---|
| PVS1 | Very strong | Loss-of-function variant type: nonsense, frameshift, canonical splice (Β±1,2), initiation codon loss |
| PS1 | Strong | Same amino acid change as an established ClinVar Pathogenic variant (review stars β₯ 2) |
| PM1 | Moderate | Located in a critical functional domain (from VEP consequence context) |
| PM2 | Moderate | Absent or extremely rare in gnomAD: AF < 0.0001 (dominant) or AF < 0.001 (recessive) |
| PM4 | Moderate | Protein length change from in-frame indel or stop-loss in a non-repeat region |
| PM5 | Moderate | Novel missense at a residue where a different pathogenic missense is established |
| PP3 | Supporting | In silico predictions support deleterious effect β CADD β₯ 25.3, SIFT=deleterious, PolyPhen=probably_damaging |
| PP5 | Supporting | Reputable source reports variant as pathogenic (ClinVar with review stars β₯ 2) |
Benign evidence:
| Code | Strength | Assessment Method |
|---|---|---|
| BA1 | Stand-alone | gnomAD total AF > 5% β classified Benign immediately |
| BS1 | Strong | gnomAD AF > 1% for rare Mendelian disease |
| BP4 | Supporting | In silico predictions support no impact β CADD < 15, SIFT=tolerated, PolyPhen=benign |
| BP6 | Supporting | Reputable source reports variant as benign (ClinVar with review stars β₯ 2) |
| BP7 | Supporting | Synonymous variant with no predicted splice impact |
Combining Rules
| Classification | Required Evidence Combination |
|---|---|
| Pathogenic | PVS1 + β₯1 PS; OR PVS1 + β₯2 PM; OR PVS1 + 1 PM + 1 PP; OR PVS1 + β₯2 PP; OR β₯2 PS; OR 1 PS + β₯3 PM; OR 1 PS + 2 PM + β₯2 PP; OR 1 PS + 1 PM + β₯4 PP |
| Likely Pathogenic | PVS1 + 1 PM; OR 1 PS + 1β2 PM; OR 1 PS + β₯2 PP; OR β₯3 PM; OR 2 PM + β₯2 PP; OR 1 PM + β₯4 PP |
| Likely Benign | 1 BS + 1 BP; OR β₯2 BP |
| Benign | BA1 alone; OR β₯2 BS |
| VUS | Does not meet any of the above; or conflicting pathogenic and benign evidence |
Key Thresholds
- BA1: gnomAD AF > 5% (Richards et al., 2015)
- BS1: gnomAD AF > 1% (rare Mendelian disease default)
- PM2: gnomAD AF < 0.0001 (dominant) or < 0.001 (recessive)
- PP3: CADD β₯ 25.3
- BP4: CADD < 15
- ClinVar minimum stars for PS1/PP5/BP6: β₯ 2
Example Queries
- "Classify the variants in this exome VCF according to ACMG guidelines"
- "Which variants in my VCF are pathogenic or likely pathogenic?"
- "Run ACMG classification on this VCF and check for secondary findings"
- "Generate an ACMG-compliant clinical report from this genome VCF"
Output Structure
output_directory/
βββ report.md # Clinical interpretation report
βββ result.json # Machine-readable classifications + summary
βββ tables/
β βββ acmg_classifications.tsv # Per-variant: gene, consequence, ACMG class, evidence codes
β βββ secondary_findings.tsv # Variants in ACMG SF v3.2 genes with classifications
βββ figures/
β βββ classification_summary.png # Bar chart of P/LP/VUS/LB/B distribution
βββ reproducibility/
βββ commands.sh # Exact command to reproduce
βββ database_versions.json # ClinVar date, gnomAD version, VEP release, SF list version
Dependencies
Required:
- Python 3.10+ (standard library for core classification engine)
requests>= 2.31 β Ensembl VEP REST API access (live mode only)matplotlib>= 3.7 β classification summary figure
Optional:
pysamβ faster VCF parsing for large files (graceful fallback to stdlib parser)pandasβ tabular data export (graceful fallback to csv module)
Safety
- Local-first: All classification logic runs locally. Only variant coordinates and alleles are sent to public Ensembl VEP REST β no patient identifiers or phenotype data ever leave the machine
- Disclaimer: Every report includes the ClawBio medical disclaimer
- No hallucinated science: Every classification traces to specific evidence codes, database entries, and published thresholds
- Audit trail: Full evidence provenance logged to
reproducibility/database_versions.json - Conservative defaults: Missing evidence is never treated as supporting pathogenicity
- Warn before overwrite: Checks for existing output before writing to a directory
Integration with Bio Orchestrator
Trigger conditions β the orchestrator routes here when:
- The user mentions ACMG, ACMG classification, pathogenic variant classification, or clinical variant interpretation
- The user provides a VCF and asks for guideline-grade or clinical-grade classification
- The user asks about secondary findings or ACMG SF screening
Chaining partners:
variant-annotation: Upstream β provides VEP-annotated VCF that this skill consumespharmgx-reporter: Downstream β pharmacogenomic loci for drugβgene interaction analysisgwas-lookup: Downstream β classified variants inspected for trait associationsclinpgx: Downstream β geneβdrug interactions for pharmacogenes found in the classified setprofile-report: Downstream β ACMG classifications feed into unified personal genomic profile
Citations
- Richards et al. (2015) β ACMG/AMP standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants. Genet Med 17:405β424
- Rehm et al. (2013) β ACMG clinical laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing. Genet Med 15:733β747
- Miller et al. (2023) β ACMG SF v3.2 list for reporting of secondary findings. Genet Med 25:100866
- Abou Tayoun et al. (2018) β PVS1 ACMG/AMP variant criterion recommendations. Human Mutation 39:1517β1524
- Li & Wang (2017) β InterVar: clinical interpretation of genetic variants. Am J Hum Genet 100:267β280
- ClinVar β NCBI clinical significance database
- gnomAD β Genome Aggregation Database
- ClinGen β Clinical Genome Resource