Skip to main content
Glama
john-walkoe

USPTO Final Petition Decisions MCP Server

by john-walkoe

Search_petitions_by_art_unit

Analyze USPTO petition decisions by art unit to identify examiner patterns, assess quality issues, and support cross-referencing with examiner data and PTAB challenge rates.

Instructions

Search petitions by art unit number for examiner/art unit quality analysis.

Use for: Art unit quality assessment, systematic petition patterns, examiner behavior analysis. Returns balanced field set for cross-referencing with PFW examiner data and PTAB challenge rates.

Example:

  • fpd_search_petitions_by_art_unit(art_unit="2128", limit=50)

  • fpd_search_petitions_by_art_unit(art_unit="2128", date_range="2020-01-01:2024-12-31")

Analysis patterns:

  • High petition frequency → Difficult examiners or challenging technology

  • Frequent revival petitions (37 CFR 1.137) → Docketing/procedural issues

  • Examiner disputes (37 CFR 1.181) → Communication/quality problems

  • Denied petitions → Weak prosecution practices

Cross-MCP integration:

  • applicationNumberText → pfw_search_applications_minimal with fields parameter for examiner names

  • Group petitions by examiner to identify individual patterns

  • patentNumber → PTAB MCP to correlate petition history with challenge success

Parameters:

  • art_unit: Art unit number (e.g., "2128", "3600")

  • date_range: Optional date range (format: "YYYY-MM-DD:YYYY-MM-DD")

  • limit: Maximum results (default 50, max 200)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
art_unitYes
date_rangeNo
limitNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • Primary MCP tool handler: decorated with @mcp.tool(name="Search_petitions_by_art_unit"), performs validation, delegates to API client, applies balanced field filtering, adds specialized LLM guidance for art unit analysis.
    @mcp.tool(name="Search_petitions_by_art_unit")
    @async_tool_error_handler("art_unit_search")
    async def fpd_search_petitions_by_art_unit(
        art_unit: str,
        date_range: Optional[str] = None,
        limit: int = 50
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Search petitions by art unit number for examiner/art unit quality analysis.
    
    **Use for:** Art unit quality assessment, systematic petition patterns, examiner behavior analysis.
    Returns balanced field set for cross-referencing with PFW examiner data and PTAB challenge rates.
    
    **Example:**
    - fpd_search_petitions_by_art_unit(art_unit="2128", limit=50)
    - fpd_search_petitions_by_art_unit(art_unit="2128", date_range="2020-01-01:2024-12-31")
    
    **Analysis patterns:**
    - High petition frequency → Difficult examiners or challenging technology
    - Frequent revival petitions (37 CFR 1.137) → Docketing/procedural issues
    - Examiner disputes (37 CFR 1.181) → Communication/quality problems
    - Denied petitions → Weak prosecution practices
    
    **Cross-MCP integration:**
    - applicationNumberText → pfw_search_applications_minimal with fields parameter for examiner names
    - Group petitions by examiner to identify individual patterns
    - patentNumber → PTAB MCP to correlate petition history with challenge success
    
    **Parameters:**
    - art_unit: Art unit number (e.g., "2128", "3600")
    - date_range: Optional date range (format: "YYYY-MM-DD:YYYY-MM-DD")
    - limit: Maximum results (default 50, max 200)"""
        try:
            # Input validation
            if not art_unit or len(art_unit.strip()) == 0:
                return format_error_response("Art unit cannot be empty", 400)
            if limit < api_constants.MIN_SEARCH_LIMIT or limit > api_constants.MAX_SEARCH_LIMIT:
                return format_error_response(f"Limit must be between {api_constants.MIN_SEARCH_LIMIT} and {api_constants.MAX_SEARCH_LIMIT}", 400)
            if date_range:
                # Basic date range format validation
                parts = date_range.split(":")
                if len(parts) != 2:
                    return format_error_response(
                        "Date range must be in format YYYY-MM-DD:YYYY-MM-DD", 400
                    )
    
            # Use API client's search_by_art_unit method
            result = await api_client.search_by_art_unit(
                art_unit=art_unit,
                date_range=date_range,
                limit=limit
            )
    
            # Check for errors
            if "error" in result:
                return result
    
            # Filter response using balanced field set
            fields = field_manager.get_fields("petitions_balanced")
            filtered_result = field_manager.filter_response(result, "petitions_balanced")
    
            # Add art unit analysis guidance
            filtered_result["llm_guidance"] = {
                "workflow": "Art Unit Discovery -> Examiner Mapping -> PTAB Correlation",
                "analysis_patterns": {
                    "high_frequency": "Many petitions → Difficult examiners/technology/systematic issues",
                    "revival_clustering": "Multiple 37 CFR 1.137 → Docketing/procedural problems",
                    "examiner_disputes": "Multiple 37 CFR 1.181 → Communication/quality issues",
                    "ptab_correlation": "High petitions + high PTAB invalidation → Quality issues"
                },
                "next_steps": [
                    "Use pfw_search_applications_minimal with fields parameter for examiner mapping",
                    "Group petitions by examiner to identify individual patterns",
                    "Check GRANTED/DENIED outcomes to assess Director overturn rates",
                    "Cross-reference patentNumbers with PTAB for challenge correlation"
                ],
                "red_flags": {
                    "high_denial_rate": "Weak prosecution practices",
                    "multiple_examiners": "Art unit-wide problem",
                    "temporal_clustering": "Process breakdown in specific periods"
                }
            }
    
            return filtered_result
    
        except ValueError as e:
            logger.warning(f"Validation error in art unit search: {str(e)}")
            return format_error_response(str(e), 400)
        except httpx.HTTPStatusError as e:
            logger.error(f"API error in art unit search: {e.response.status_code} - {e.response.text}")
            return format_error_response(f"API error: {e.response.text}", e.response.status_code)
        except httpx.TimeoutException as e:
            logger.error(f"API timeout in art unit search: {str(e)}")
            return format_error_response("Request timeout - please try again", 408)
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Unexpected error in art unit search: {str(e)}")
            return format_error_response(f"Internal error: {str(e)}", 500)
  • Service layer handler that delegates to API client and applies field filtering.
    async def search_by_art_unit(
        self,
        art_unit: str,
        date_range: Optional[str] = None,
        limit: int = 50
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Search petitions by art unit
    
        Args:
            art_unit: Art unit number
            date_range: Optional date range filter
            limit: Number of results to return
    
        Returns:
            Search results for the art unit
        """
        result = await self.api_client.search_by_art_unit(
            art_unit=art_unit,
            date_range=date_range,
            limit=limit
        )
    
        # Filter response using balanced field set
        if "error" not in result:
            result = self.field_manager.filter_response(result, "petitions_balanced")
    
        return result
  • Core API client implementation: constructs Lucene query for art unit search, applies date range filters, delegates to generic search_petitions method.
    async def search_by_art_unit(
        self,
        art_unit: str,
        date_range: Optional[str] = None,
        limit: int = 50
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Search petitions by art unit number
    
        Args:
            art_unit: Art unit number (e.g., "2128")
            date_range: Optional date range filter (e.g., "2020-01-01:2024-12-31")
            limit: Maximum number of results
    
        Returns:
            Dict containing search results
        """
        try:
            # Build query
            query = f"{QueryFieldNames.ART_UNIT}:{art_unit}"
    
            # Build filters for date range if provided
            filters = []
            if date_range:
                # Parse date range
                parts = date_range.split(":")
                if len(parts) == 2:
                    filters.append({
                        "field": FPDFields.PETITION_MAIL_DATE,
                        "valueFrom": parts[0],
                        "valueTo": parts[1]
                    })
    
            return await self.search_petitions(
                query=query,
                filters=filters if filters else None,
                limit=limit
            )
    
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Error in search_by_art_unit: {str(e)}")
            return format_error_response(str(e), 500, generate_request_id())
  • MCP tool registration decorator specifying the tool name.
    @mcp.tool(name="Search_petitions_by_art_unit")
  • Input schema defined by function parameters: art_unit (required str), date_range (optional str), limit (optional int=50). Output: Dict[str, Any] with filtered results and guidance.
    async def fpd_search_petitions_by_art_unit(
        art_unit: str,
        date_range: Optional[str] = None,
        limit: int = 50
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by explaining the tool's purpose, return format ('balanced field set for cross-referencing'), and integration patterns. It describes analysis patterns for interpreting results and cross-MCP workflows. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions, leaving some behavioral aspects uncovered.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with clear sections (purpose, use cases, examples, analysis patterns, integration, parameters) and every sentence adds value. It's appropriately sized for a complex tool with integration needs, though slightly longer than minimal. The front-loaded purpose statement immediately clarifies the tool's function.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but with output schema), the description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, usage guidelines, parameter semantics, analysis patterns, and cross-tool integration workflows. The output schema existence means return values don't need explanation, and the description provides everything else needed for effective use.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed parameter explanations: art_unit format examples ('2128', '3600'), date_range format specification ('YYYY-MM-DD:YYYY-MM-DD'), and limit details (default 50, max 200). It adds practical examples showing parameter usage, giving clear semantic meaning beyond the bare schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool searches petitions by art unit number for examiner/art unit quality analysis, using specific verbs ('search', 'returns') and resources ('petitions', 'art unit number'). It distinguishes from siblings like Search_petitions_by_application by focusing on art unit rather than application, and from Search_petitions_balanced/minimal by specifying balanced field sets for cross-referencing.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The 'Use for:' section explicitly lists specific scenarios (art unit quality assessment, systematic petition patterns, examiner behavior analysis). It provides clear alternatives by mentioning cross-MCP integration with pfw_search_applications_minimal and PTAB MCP, and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on art unit analysis rather than application-based or minimal searches.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/john-walkoe/uspto_fpd_mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server