Evaluator-in-the-Loop Monte Carlo Tree Search via LLM Agents for Motif Scaffolding in Protein Design

We introduce RosettaSearch, an inference-time multi-objective optimization approach for backbone conditioned protein sequence design. We use large language models (LLMs) as a generative optimizer within a search algorithm capable of controlled exploration and exploitation, using rewards computed from RosettaFold3, a structure prediction model, under a strict computational budget. In a large-scale evaluation, we apply RosettaSearch to 400 suboptimal sequences generated by LigandMPNN (a state-of-the-art model trained for protein sequence design), recovering high-fidelity designs that LigandMPNN's single-pass decoding fails to produce. RosettaSearch's designs show improvements in structural fidelity metrics ranging between 18% to 68%, translating to a 2.5x improvement in design success rate. We observe that these gains in success rate are robust when RosettaSearch-designed sequences are evaluated with an independent structure prediction oracle (Chai-1) and generalize across two distinct LLM families (o4-mini and Gemini-3), with performance scaling consistently with reasoning capability. We further demonstrate that RosettaSearch improves the sequence fidelity of ProteinMPNN designs for de novo backbones from the Dayhoff atlas, showing that the approach generalizes beyond native protein structures to computationally generated backbones. We also demonstrate a multi-modal extension of RosettaSearch with vision-language models, where images of predicted protein structures are used as feedback to incorporate structural context to guide protein sequence generation. To our knowledge, this is the first large-scale demonstration that LLMs can serve as effective generative optimizers for backbone-conditioned protein sequence design, yielding systematic gains without any model retraining.

Scientific LLM agents have shown promise in literature reasoning, tool use, and experiment planning, but it remains unclear whether they can autonomously improve large, tightly coupled scientific machine-learning systems through executable code changes and computationally expensive validation. We study this question in protein folding, where progress requires coordinated architectural modifications, multi-objective evaluation, and domain-aware interpretation. We present AgentFold, a multi-agent framework that formulates folding-model development as a closed-loop search over executable code variants. Starting from ESMFold, AgentFold proposes hypotheses, implements and debugs code-level modifications, evaluates model variants, analyzes experimental outcomes, and stores both successful and failed interventions in structured memory. An MCTS-style policy allocates computational resources across high-scoring search branches. On an engineering-scale protein-folding codebase comprising more than 2,000 lines of code, AgentFold explores approximately 80 model variants using approximately 5,000 GPU-hours and 170 million LLM tokens. Under a matched computational budget, AgentFold improves the best lDDT by 7.5% over independent Codex proposals and outperforms a random-search control. Beyond model improvement, the resulting intervention traces reveal recurring empirical design patterns: stable gains tend to arise from early, soft, learnable priors and gated refinement, whereas direct geometric perturbations and geometry-conditioned feedback often destabilize training. The code and experimental resources are publicly available at https://github.com/lmqfly/AgentFold.

We introduce ABLE, a benchmark for evaluating LLM agents' ability to use biological AI models (BAIMs), such as ProteinMPNN and AlphaFold3, in dual-use protein design workflows. ABLE assesses agent performance through a set of tasks spanning structure retrieval, sequence generation, and design validation. We evaluate 15 frontier models and find that seven refuse all tasks, while the remaining models exhibit substantial performance differences. Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemini 3 Pro achieve the highest scores across information retrieval, tool selection, and tool use. We further compare model performance on a subset of tasks against an expert human baseline. Our results suggest that current LLMs can substantially lower barriers to protein design, but remain inconsistent in planning, strategy generation, and integrating biological knowledge with tool use.