uspto_ptab_decisions

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Search' aligns. It adds context about decision types but does not disclose other behaviors such as rate limits, authentication needs, or result structure. With annotations present, minimal extra value is provided.

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

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

The description is extremely concise at two sentences, front-loading the purpose and including key searchable aspects without unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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

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

Given the tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose but lacks details on query syntax, result format, or pagination behavior. It is adequate but could be more helpful for first-time users.

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

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions searchable criteria (trial type, outcome, etc.) but does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, which already specify formats and examples.

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

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

The description clearly states the tool searches PTAB trial decisions and lists specific types like institution and final written decisions. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like uspto_ptab_proceedings, which may also involve PTAB content.

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

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The implied usage is through listing searchable criteria, but explicit comparisons with siblings are absent.

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