Patent PreCheck

Patent PreCheck — start an Interactive Code Review

precheck_start_review

Return the URL where the user can start a paid (or promo-unlocked) Interactive Code Review that strengthens each pillar with evidence and produces a filing package. Use after precheck_score when the user wants to act on the result.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	No	Optional email hint (prefill only; user confirms on signup).
`promo`	No	Optional promo / beta access code (e.g. Beta) to skip payment.
`report_id`	No	Optional free-score report id (PPC-YYYY-MM-DD-XXXXX) to carry forward.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedJun 17, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / email

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional email hint (prefill only; user confirms on signup).",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / promo

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional promo / beta access code (e.g. Beta) to skip payment.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / report_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional free-score report id (PPC-YYYY-MM-DD-XXXXX) to carry forward.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJun 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Discloses that the review is paid or promo-unlocked and produces a filing package. No annotations; description lacks information on authentication, side effects, or what happens after URL is returned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words, effectively front-loads purpose and usage guideline.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Provides enough context for a simple tool with optional parameters and no output schema. Missing explicit instruction on what to do with the URL, but overall it's clear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, such as an example for 'promo'. Baseline score is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns a URL to start a specific review, and mentions it's used after precheck_score. However, it does not fully distinguish from all sibling tools, only referencing one.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells when to use: after precheck_score when the user wants to act. Provides clear context but no exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Patent PreCheck tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?