Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →**GPU**: T4 (16GB) | **Timeout**: 600s default
.claude/skills/ligandmpnn/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-15 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| Requirement | Minimum | Recommended | |-------------|---------|-------------| | Python | 3.8+ | 3.10 | | CUDA | 11.0+ | 11.7+ | | GPU VRAM | 8GB | 16GB (T4) | | RAM | 8GB | 16GB |
> First time? See Installation Guide to set up Modal and biomodals.
bashcd biomodals modal run modal_ligandmpnn.py \ --pdb-path protein_ligand.pdb \ --num-seq-per-target 16 \ --sampling-temp 0.1
GPU: T4 (16GB) | Timeout: 600s default
bashgit clone https://github.com/dauparas/LigandMPNN.git cd LigandMPNN python run.py \ --pdb_path protein_ligand.pdb \ --out_folder output/ \ --num_seq_per_target 16
| Parameter | Default | Range | Description | |-----------|---------|-------|-------------| | --pdb_path | required | path | PDB with ligand | | --num_seq_per_target | 1 | 1-1000 | Sequences per structure | | --sampling_temp | "0.1" | "0.0001-1.0" | Temperature (string!) | | --ligand_mpnn_use_side_chain_context | true | bool | Use ligand context |
Ligand must be present as HETATM records:
ATOM ...protein atoms...
HETATM 1 C1 LIG A 999 x.xxx y.yyy z.zzz 1.00 0.00 Coutput/
├── seqs/
│ └── protein.fa # FASTA sequences
└── protein_pdb/
└── protein_0001.pdb # PDBs with designed sequence$ python run.py --pdb_path enzyme_substrate.pdb --out_folder output/ --num_seq_per_target 8
Loading LigandMPNN model weights...
Processing enzyme_substrate.pdb
Found ligand: LIG (12 atoms)
Generated 8 sequences in 3.1 seconds
output/seqs/enzyme_substrate.fa:
>enzyme_substrate_0001, score=1.45, global_score=1.38
MKTAYIAKQRQISFVKSHFSRQLE...
>enzyme_substrate_0002, score=1.52, global_score=1.41
MKTAYIAKQRQISFVKSQFSRQLD...What good output looks like:
Should I use LigandMPNN?
│
├─ What's in your binding site?
│ ├─ Small molecule / ligand → LigandMPNN ✓
│ ├─ Metal ion (Zn, Fe, etc.) → LigandMPNN ✓
│ ├─ Cofactor (NAD, FAD, ATP) → LigandMPNN ✓
│ ├─ DNA/RNA → LigandMPNN ✓
│ └─ Nothing / protein only → Use ProteinMPNN
│
├─ What type of design?
│ ├─ Enzyme active site → LigandMPNN ✓
│ ├─ Metal binding site → LigandMPNN ✓
│ ├─ Protein-protein binder → Use ProteinMPNN
│ └─ De novo scaffold → Use ProteinMPNN
│
└─ Priority?
├─ Solubility/expression → Consider SolubleMPNN
└─ Ligand context accuracy → LigandMPNN ✓| Campaign Size | Time (T4) | Cost (Modal) | Notes | |---------------|-----------|--------------|-------| | 100 backbones × 8 seq | 15-20 min | ~$2 | Standard | | 500 backbones × 8 seq | 1-1.5h | ~$8 | Large campaign |
Throughput: ~50-100 sequences/minute on T4 GPU.
bashgrep -c "^>" output/seqs/*.fa # Should match backbone_count × num_seq_per_target
Ligand not recognized: Check HETATM format, verify ligand residue name Poor binding residues: Increase sampling around active site Missing contacts: Verify ligand coordinates in PDB
| Error | Cause | Fix | |-------|-------|-----| | RuntimeError: CUDA out of memory | Long protein or large batch | Reduce batch_size | | KeyError: 'LIG' | Ligand not found in PDB | Check HETATM records | | ValueError: no ligand atoms | Empty ligand | Verify ligand has atoms in PDB |
Next: Structure prediction for validation → protein-qc for filtering.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-15 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 18 counted toward the lift figure. The other 4 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +55 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 18 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.