tooluniverse-binder-discovery
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.
What this skill does
# 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 + SMILRelated in Sales & CRM
process-mapper
IncludedUse when a BizOps lead, COO, or process-improvement owner needs to document an end-to-end business process (procurement, employee onboarding, incident handoff, customer-onboarding, claims adjudication) in BPMN-style notation, measure cycle times by stage, surface where work spends most of its time waiting vs. being worked, and quantify the gap between processing time and total elapsed time. Pairs Lean / Six Sigma / Theory-of-Constraints canon with deterministic stdlib-only Python tools to produce a process map, a ranked bottleneck list (with severity + root-cause hypothesis), and a cycle-time analysis (P50, P90, value-add ratio, Little's-Law throughput). Distinct from sales-pipeline, system-reliability (SLO), and strategic-OKR work — this is tactical process documentation for internal operations.
payment-integration
IncludedIntegrate payments with SePay (VietQR), Polar, Stripe, Paddle (MoR subscriptions), Creem.io (licensing). Checkout, webhooks, subscriptions, QR codes, multi-provider orders.
customer-success-manager
IncludedMonitors customer health, predicts churn risk, and identifies expansion opportunities using weighted scoring models for SaaS customer success
sales-engineer
IncludedAnalyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.
customer-success-manager
IncludedMonitors customer health, predicts churn risk, and identifies expansion opportunities using weighted scoring models for SaaS customer success
sales-engineer
IncludedAnalyzes RFP/RFI responses for coverage gaps, builds competitive feature comparison matrices, and plans proof-of-concept (POC) engagements for pre-sales engineering. Use when responding to RFPs, bids, or proposal requests; comparing product features against competitors; planning or scoring a customer POC or sales demo; preparing a technical proposal; or performing win/loss competitor analysis. Handles tasks described as 'RFP response', 'bid response', 'proposal response', 'competitor comparison', 'feature matrix', 'POC planning', 'sales demo prep', or 'pre-sales engineering'.