Binder Design Tool Selection

Decision tree

De novo binder design?
│
├─ Standard target → BoltzGen (recommended)
│   All-atom output (no separate ProteinMPNN step needed)
│   Better for ligand/small molecule binding
│   Single-step design (backbone + sequence + side chains)
│
├─ Need diversity/exploration → RFdiffusion + ProteinMPNN
│   Maximum backbone diversity
│   Two-step: backbone then sequence
│
├─ Integrated validation → BindCraft
│   Built-in AF2 validation
│   End-to-end pipeline
│
├─ Ligand binding → BoltzGen ✓
│   All-atom diffusion handles ligand context
│
├─ Peptide/nanobody → Germinal
│   VHH/nanobody design
│   Germline-aware optimization
│
└─ Antibody/Nanobody
    +-- VHH design --> germinal skill

Tool comparison

Tool	Strengths	Weaknesses	Best For
BoltzGen	All-atom, single-step, ligand-aware	Higher GPU requirement	Standard (recommended)
BindCraft	End-to-end, built-in AF2 validation	Less diverse	Production campaigns
RFdiffusion	High diversity, fast	Requires ProteinMPNN	Exploration, diversity
Germinal	Nanobody/VHH design	Specialized	Antibody optimization

Recommended Pipeline: BoltzGen → Chai → QC

BoltzGen provides all-atom design with built-in side-chain packing:

Target → BoltzGen → Validate → Filter
 (pdb)  (all-atom)   (chai)     (qc)

1. Target preparation

# Fetch structure from PDB
# Use pdb skill for guidance

• Trim to binding region + 10A buffer
• Remove waters and ligands
• Renumber chains if needed

2. Hotspot selection

• Choose 3-6 exposed residues
• Prefer charged/aromatic residues
• Cluster spatially (within 10-15A)

3. Design with BoltzGen (Recommended)

First, create a YAML config file (e.g., binder.yaml):

entities:
  - protein:
      id: B
      sequence: 70..100