website: the length and completeness fields are very large in the search bar and do not give bounds

[anna-parker]

There is no way to know that completeness is a float from 0 to 1, we should make this clear in the selector, the same goes for length we should show the length of the reference (or the longest existing sequence in the case of insertions) as an upper bound

[claude]

This issue may be related to #5840 ('Create a Segment presence filter checkbox for multi-segmented viruses and remove or decrease the size length check boxes'), which also discusses the length filter being very large and hard to use in the search bar. While #5840 focuses on multi-segmented organisms and proposes replacing the length checkboxes with a segment presence filter, this issue addresses the broader UX problem of missing bounds/range information for both the length and completeness fields. These may benefit from being addressed together.

[theosanderson]

This should, to the user, be a percentage not a float

[theosanderson]

@theosanderson-agent make a PR for the percentage case

[theosanderson-agent]

Created draft PR #6049 for the percentage case. The changes:

• Adds a percentage metadata config option
• Shows "Completeness (%)" as the group label in the search form
• Users enter values in 0–100 range (e.g. "95" for 95%)
• Values are automatically converted to 0–1 floats for the LAPIS API
• Active filter badges show "%" suffix (e.g. "95%")

The length/bounds aspect of the issue is not addressed in this PR.