Vep Annotator
C 67 completed
Other
unknown / cpp · tiny
43
Files
20,794
LOC
0
Frameworks
4
Languages
Pipeline State
completedRun ID
#1541613Phase
doneProgress
0%Started
2026-04-16 20:53:03Finished
2026-04-16 20:53:03LLM tokens
0Pipeline Metadata
Stage
CatalogedDecision
proceedNovelty
44.00Framework unique
—Isolation
—Last stage change
2026-05-10 03:34:51Deduplication group #47258
Member of a group with 648 similar repo(s) — canonical #1577108 view group →
Powered by Repobility — scan your code at https://repobility.com
🧪 Code Distillation
Browse all specs →AI Prompt
Create a high-performance C++ tool that replicates the core functionality of Ensembl's Variant Effect Predictor (VEP). I need it to take variant data and perform comprehensive annotation. Key features must include consequence prediction using Sequence Ontology terms, calculating impact classifications (HIGH, MODERATE, LOW, MODIFIER), and generating HGVS notations (HGVSc, HGVSp, HGVSg). The tool should support multiple output formats: TSV (default), JSON, and VCF. Additionally, please incorporate support for pathogenicity predictions using scores like SIFT, CADD, and gnomAD, as well as structural variant annotation and handling of regulatory features like promoters and enhancers.
cpp bioinformatics variant-calling annotation cpp-plus-plus vcf json high-performance
Generated by gemma4:latest
Catalog Information
Create a high-performance C++ tool that replicates the core functionality of Ensembl's Variant Effect Predictor (VEP). I need it to take variant data and perform comprehensive annotation. Key features must include consequence prediction using Sequence Ontology terms, calculating impact classifications (HIGH, MODERATE, LOW, MODIFIER), and generating HGVS notations (HGVSc, HGVSp, HGVSg). The tool should support multiple output formats: TSV (default), JSON, and VCF. Additionally, please incorporate
Tags
cpp bioinformatics variant-calling annotation cpp-plus-plus vcf json high-performance
Quality Score
C
66.6/100
Structure
64
Code Quality
50
Documentation
70
Testing
60
Practices
78
Security
100
Dependencies
80
Strengths
- Good test coverage (36% test-to-source ratio)
- Consistent naming conventions (snake_case)
- Good security practices — no major issues detected
- Properly licensed project
Weaknesses
- No CI/CD configuration — manual testing and deployment
- 1714 duplicate lines detected — consider DRY refactoring
- 6 'god files' with >500 LOC need decomposition
Recommendations
- Set up CI/CD (GitHub Actions recommended) to automate testing and deployment
- Add a linter configuration to enforce code style consistency
Languages
Frameworks
None detected
Symbols
method379
function118
class41
struct41
module25
enum12
type_alias2
macro1
Embed Badge
Add to your README:
Provenance: Repobility (https://repobility.com) — every score reproducible from /scan/
BinComp Dependency Hardening
All packages →1 of this repo's dependencies have been scanned for binary hardening. Grade reflects RELRO / stack canary / FORTIFY / PIE coverage.