Skip to main content
Glama
riemannzeta

USPTO Patent MCP Server

by riemannzeta
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

ptab_search_decisions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search PTAB trial decisions by full text, decision type, proceeding or patent number, and date range to find relevant institution, final, or termination rulings.

Instructions

Search PTAB trial decisions. Live via USPTO ODP v3.0.

Args:
    query: Full-text search in decision text
    decision_type: Type (institution, final, termination)
    proceeding_number: Filter by proceeding number
    patent_number: Filter by patent number
    decision_date_from: Date range start (YYYY-MM-DD)
    decision_date_to: Date range end (YYYY-MM-DD)
    offset: Starting position (default: 0)
    limit: Max results (default: 25)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryNo
offsetNo
decision_typeNo
patent_numberNo
decision_date_toNo
proceeding_numberNo
decision_date_fromNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.8.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "object"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "ptab_search_decisionsOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results come live from the USPTO ODP v3.0 endpoint, implying freshness and live-network dependency, but says nothing about rate limits, result ordering, or pagination semantics beyond the offset/limit params.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by a clean per-parameter list with no filler. The Args block is the conventional docstring form and each line earns its place, though the formatting is slightly mechanical.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For an 8-parameter search with no output schema and no annotations gaps, the description covers inputs adequately but never describes what a returned decision record contains or how pagination should be driven. An agent knows how to call it but not fully what to expect back.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full load, and it does document all eight parameters with meaning beyond the bare titles ('Full-text search in decision text', date format YYYY-MM-DD, decision_type examples institution/final/termination). It stops short of clarifying offset/limit interaction or match semantics for query, so it is solid but not exhaustive.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb+resource ('Search PTAB trial decisions'), which clearly distinguishes it from single-record siblings like ptab_get_decision or ptab_get_documents. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with ptab_search_proceedings or the other PTAB search tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description offers no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. 'Live via USPTO ODP v3.0' is provenance, not guidance on when this search should be chosen over ptab_search_proceedings or ptab_get_decision.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools