BindCraft Binder Design

SkillMedia

Design protein binders — small proteins built to attach to a chosen target — from start to finish using BindCraft. Once added, your AI can run a full design campaign and check each candidate with built-in AlphaFold2 validation before handing back the results. You control the pace with fast, default, or slow settings.

Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.

After adding the skill, tell your AI what you want a binder designed against and pick a speed setting — fast, default, or slow — to start a campaign.

Then ask your AI: use the BindCraft Binder Design skill

What your AI can do with it

  • Run end-to-end protein binder design campaigns
  • Validate designs with built-in AlphaFold2 (AF2) checks
  • Run production-quality binder campaigns
  • Switch between fast, default, and slow design speeds
  • Optimize the binder's backbone structure and amino acid sequence together

What this skill tells your AI

The instructions your AI receives, as published by adaptyvbio/protein-design-skills in skills/bindcraft/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.

Prerequisites

RequirementMinimumRecommended
Python3.9+3.10
CUDA11.7+12.0+
GPU VRAM32GB48GB (L40S)
RAM32GB64GB

How to run

First time? See Getting started to set up Modal and biomodals.

Option 1: Modal (recommended)

cd biomodals
modal run modal_bindcraft.py \
  --input-pdb target.pdb \
  --target-chains A \
  --target-hotspot-residues "45,67,89" \
  --lengths "70,100" \
  --number-of-final-designs 50

GPU: L40S (48GB) | Timeout: 300 min default

Option 2: Local installation

git clone https://github.com/martinpacesa/BindCraft.git
cd BindCraft

# BindCraft is configured with JSON files, not flags
python -u ./bindcraft.py \
  --settings ./settings_target/mytarget.json \
  --filters ./settings_filters/default_filters.json \
  --advanced ./settings_advanced/default_4stage_multimer.json

The target PDB, chains, hotspots, and binder length range are set inside the --settings JSON. See the BindCraft repo for the settings schema.

Key parameters (Modal wrapper)

ParameterDefaultDescription
--input-pdbrequiredTarget structure
--target-chainsATarget chain(s)
--target-hotspot-residues""Target hotspots (e.g. "45,67,89")
--lengths50,130Binder length range
--number-of-final-designs1Passing designs to return
--max-trajectoriesnoneCap on trajectories

Output format

output/
├── design_0/
│   ├── binder.pdb         # Final design
│   ├── complex.pdb        # Binder + target
│   ├── metrics.json       # QC scores
│   └── trajectory/        # Optimization trajectory
├── design_1/
│   └── ...
└── summary.csv            # All metrics

Metrics Output

{
  "plddt": 0.89,
  "ptm": 0.78,
  "iptm": 0.62,
  "pae": 8.5,
  "rmsd": 1.2,
  "sequence": "MKTAYIAK..."
}

Sample output

Successful run

$ modal run modal_bindcraft.py --input-pdb target.pdb --target-chains A --target-hotspot-residues "45,67,89" --number-of-final-designs 50
[INFO] Loading BindCraft model...
[INFO] Target: target.pdb (chain A)
[INFO] Hotspots: 45, 67, 89
[INFO] Generating designs...

Design 1/50:
  Length: 78 AA
  pLDDT: 0.89, ipTM: 0.62
  Saved: output/design_0/

Design 50/50:
  Length: 85 AA
  pLDDT: 0.86, ipTM: 0.58
  Saved: output/design_49/

[INFO] Campaign complete. Summary: output/summary.csv
Pass rate: 32/50 (64%) with ipTM > 0.5

What good output looks like:

  • pLDDT: > 0.85 for most designs
  • ipTM: > 0.5 for passing designs
  • Pass rate: 30-70% depending on target
  • Diverse sequences across designs

Decision tree

Should I use BindCraft?
│
├─ What type of design?
│  ├─ Production-quality binders → BindCraft ✓
│  ├─ High diversity exploration → RFdiffusion
│  └─ All-atom precision → BoltzGen
│
├─ What matters most?
│  ├─ Experimental success rate → BindCraft ✓
│  ├─ Speed / diversity → RFdiffusion + ProteinMPNN
│  ├─ AF2 gradient optimization → ColabDesign
│  └─ All-atom control → BoltzGen
│
└─ Compute resources?
   ├─ Have L40S/A100 → BindCraft ✓
   └─ Only A10G → RFdiffusion + ProteinMPNN

Typical performance

Campaign SizeTime (L40S)Cost (Modal)Notes
50 designs2-4h~$15Quick campaign
100 designs4-8h~$30Standard
200 designs8-16h~$60Large campaign

Adaptyv's own tests of these models showed BindCraft costing about $2.90 per accepted design, averaged across 7 targets.

Experimental success rate (BindCraft paper): 10 to 100%, averaging 46.3% across 12 targets; strongly target-dependent.


Verify

find output -name "binder.pdb" | wc -l  # Should match num_designs

Troubleshooting

Low ipTM scores: Check hotspot selection, increase designs Slow convergence: Use fast protocol for screening OOM errors: Reduce num_models, use L40S GPU Poor diversity: Lower sampling_temp, run multiple seeds

Error interpretation

ErrorCauseFix
RuntimeError: CUDA out of memoryLarge target or long binderUse L40S/A100, reduce binder length
ValueError: no hotspotsHotspots not foundCheck residue numbering
TimeoutErrorDesign taking too longUse fast protocol

Next: Rank by ipsae → experimental validation.

Signals

GitHub stars
159
Forks
21
Last commit
Jun 2026
Advanced
Catalog kind
skill
Gateway key
bindcraft
Source
github.com/adaptyvbio/protein-design-skills