ptab_get_decision

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only adds 'Live via USPTO ODP v3.0', which is minor. It does not disclose return format, rate limits, or any side effects, and the read-only nature is only implicit in the verb 'Get'.

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 compact, front-loaded, and every element serves a purpose. The 'Args' block is clear, and the 'Live via USPTO ODP v3.0' line adds useful context without being verbose.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it does not explain what 'details' include or how it relates to similar sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding between alternatives.

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?

The description explicitly documents the sole parameter with 'Decision identifier (trial number, e.g. IPR2022-00001)', which compensates for the schema's 0% description coverage. It provides both a semantic label and a concrete example.

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 states 'Get details of a specific PTAB decision', which is a specific verb+resource phrase. It clearly distinguishes from search_decisions (plural search) and ptab_get_proceeding (a different entity), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to sibling tools. It implies usage through the decision_id argument, but does not state when to prefer this over ptab_search_decisions or ptab_get_proceeding.

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