Nexscope Ecommerce Data MCP

Nexscope Utility Patent Image Search

nexscope_zhihuiya_utility_patent_image_search

Perform visual similarity search for utility model patents using an image URL, with filtering by country, legal status, date ranges, and assignee. Supports utility model patents only (type U) with shape-only or shape+pattern+color matching models. Triggered when users mention utility patent image search, utility model patent search, utility patent infringement check, product structure patent search, or utility model visual search. Even if the user does not explicitly mention "utility patent," this skill should be triggered whenever the need involves searching for similar utility model patents through an image. For design patents, use ecommerce.zhihuiya-patent-image-search instead.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`loc`	No	LOC classifications (Locarno classification numbers). Join multiple classifications with AND, OR, or NOT
`url`	Yes	Image URL (maximum 1,000 characters)
`lang`	No	Preferred title language: original (original patent title), cn (Chinese-translated title), or en (English-translated title). Default: original
`field`	No	Result sort field: SCORE (relevance), APD (application date), PBD (publication date), or ISD (grant date). Default: SCORE
`limit`	No	Number of patents to return, from 1 to 100. Default: 10
`model`	Yes	Image-search model. Design patents: 1 (smart association, recommended) or 2 (search this image). Utility model patents: 3 (match shape) or 4 (match shape, pattern, and color; recommended)
`order`	No	Available when field is APD, PBD, or ISD: desc (descending) or asc (ascending). Default: desc
`offset`	No	Result offset, from 0 to 1,000. Default: 0
`country`	No	Patent authority codes for countries, organizations, or regions, separated by commas, for example CN,US,JP. Omit to search all patent authorities
`isHttps`	No	Whether to return images over HTTPS: 1 for HTTPS and 0 for HTTP. Default: 0
`stemming`	No	Whether to enable stemming: 1 for enabled and 0 for disabled. Default: 0
`assignees`	No	Applicant or patent owner (maximum 1,000 characters)
`mainField`	No	Primary patent fields, including title, abstract, claims, specification, publication number, application number, applicant, inventor, and IPC/UPC/LOC classifications (maximum 1,000 characters)
`preFilter`	No	Whether to enable country/LOC pre-filtering: 1 for enabled and 0 for disabled. Default: 1
`patentType`	Yes	Patent type: U for a utility model patent. Default: U
`legalStatus`	No	Comma-separated patent legal-status codes. Values: 1 (published), 2 (substantive examination), 3 (granted), 8 (duplicate-grant avoidance), 11 (withdrawn), 12 (withdrawn-unspecified), 17 (deemed withdrawn), 18 (voluntarily withdrawn), 13 (rejected), 14 (fully revoked), 15 (expired), 16 (annual fee unpaid), 21 (rights restored), 22 (rights terminated), 23 (partially invalid), 24 (application terminated), 30 (abandoned), 19 (deemed abandoned), 20 (voluntarily abandoned), 25 (abandoned-unspecified), 222 (PCT did not enter designated state within designation period), 223 (PCT entered designated state within designation period), 224 (PCT entered designated state after designation period), and 225 (PCT did not enter designated state after designation period)
`returnImgId`	No	Whether to return img_id. Default: false
`applyEndTime`	No	Patent application end date in yyyyMMdd format
`publicEndTime`	No	Patent publication end date in yyyyMMdd format
`applyStartTime`	No	Patent application start date in yyyyMMdd format
`scoreExpansion`	No	Score expansion
`publicStartTime`	No	Patent publication start date in yyyyMMdd format
`simpleLegalStatus`	No	Comma-separated simplified patent legal-status codes. Values: 0 (inactive), 1 (active), 2 (pending), 220 (PCT designation period expired), 221 (within PCT designation period), and 999 (unconfirmed)
`includeMachineTranslation`	No	Include machine-translated data in the search

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, but the description presents the operation as a visual similarity search, i.e., a read/query operation with no mutation described. That is an annotation contradiction, and the description supplies no side-effect context that would justify the non-read-only hint.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the sentences are task-oriented; the trigger list and implicit-need sentence add routing value. There is mild redundancy between the explicit trigger list and the implicit-need sentence, which keeps it from a 5.

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 a 24-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, required inputs, filters, and the design-patent alternative. It still omits what the search returns and leaves pagination, sorting, and pre-filter behavior entirely to the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description maps filters to country, legal status, date ranges, and assignee and names the utility-model matching models, but it adds little beyond the schema for the remaining parameters.

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 first sentence names a specific verb (visual similarity search), the resource (utility model patents), the input (image URL), and the filter dimensions. It also explicitly limits scope to type U and distinguishes design patents, so an agent can separate it from broader patent-image sibling tools.

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?

It gives explicit trigger phrases, adds the implicit-need case, and directs design-patent queries to a named alternative. The when-to-use and when-not-to-use routing is stated directly rather than inferred.

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

All Nexscope Ecommerce Data MCP 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?