Biotools-API #208
Merged
Biotools-API #208
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
for spelling differences, capitalisation, ...
as proteomics is in the API docs examples
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR introduces an API calling module for supporting bio.tools
It is a minimum working example with a single benchmark case; the Pydantic class includes all fields of the tool API, which may not be optimal either.
To be robust, we need more benchmark cases at the least, and additionally some evaluation of the usefulness of the many API fields, not all of which may be necessary and thus distracting the LLM.
Recommend merge despite these limitations because these changes are not breaking anything, just adding functionality that does not need to be used.