Skip to main content
Glama

graphic_trademark_search

按目标国家查询 One1 已覆盖的图形商标数据,返回视觉近似候选。

用于卖家查自家 Logo/图案是否撞已注册图形商标(CLIP 视觉相似 + 名录加权)。
image_url: 公网可访问的图片 URL(PNG/JPG)。
nice_class: 尼斯类别,可选。limit: 默认 10。
返回: {count, results:[{mark, visual_similarity, risk_level, applicant, legal_status}]}。

country: 单个国家/地区代码,不是任意 ISO 代码;去首尾空白并转大写。省略、空串或纯空白默认 US。英国使用 UK,欧盟 EU,马德里国际注册 WO;不接受多国列表。文本本地配置支持:AR, AT, AU, AZ, BR, CA, CL, CN, CZ, DZ, EE, ES, EU, FI, FR, GE, HR, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KH, KR, LT, MX, NO, NZ, PL, PT, PY, RO, SG, SK, TW, UA, UK, US, VN, WO。实际文本检索合作方路由为 BX/DE/ES/IT/TR;BX 未列入覆盖快照,覆盖未验证。编号/权利人工具仅查本地源,能力与文本检索不同。历史图形接口还接受 USPAT 等设计库代码,返回专利图形候选,不代表商标国家覆盖。图形以 coverage_info 的 graphic_served 和实际后端可用性为准,可能有 ARIPO/OAPI 等地区代码。 先调用 coverage_info(country="") 获取覆盖清单,再以目标代码查询各国覆盖。全表来自静态快照,单国优先后端、失败回落静态;注意 warning、scope 和 clearance_ok(工具输出不含数据截止日字段,需要截止日请让用户查 https://one1.cn/api/coverage?country=XX)。各国数据范围、截止时间和完整性不同,多国支持不等于全球全量覆盖;无命中不等于可注册或不侵权。coverage.clearance_ok=false 时不能给可注册结论;true 也不是法律保证。count 是返回数量(文本近似检索为邻居数量),不是冲突数;结合 has_conflicts、conflict_count 和逐条风险信号判断。visual_similarity 不是侵权概率。TRO/enforcement 是库内信号,需核对来源和时间。USPTO/TSDR 仅适用于美国记录,其他国家核对相应官方来源。US 请求仅为示例。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
countryNo单个国家/地区代码,不是任意 ISO 代码;去首尾空白并转大写。省略、空串或纯空白默认 US。英国使用 UK,欧盟 EU,马德里国际注册 WO;不接受多国列表。文本本地配置支持:AR, AT, AU, AZ, BR, CA, CL, CN, CZ, DZ, EE, ES, EU, FI, FR, GE, HR, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KH, KR, LT, MX, NO, NZ, PL, PT, PY, RO, SG, SK, TW, UA, UK, US, VN, WO。实际文本检索合作方路由为 BX/DE/ES/IT/TR;BX 未列入覆盖快照,覆盖未验证。编号/权利人工具仅查本地源,能力与文本检索不同。历史图形接口还接受 USPAT 等设计库代码,返回专利图形候选,不代表商标国家覆盖。图形以 coverage_info 的 graphic_served 和实际后端可用性为准,可能有 ARIPO/OAPI 等地区代码。US
image_urlYes
nice_classNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / country / description
      Added value: +"单个国家/地区代码,不是任意 ISO 代码;去首尾空白并转大写。省略、空串或纯空白默认 US。英国使用 UK,欧盟 EU,马德里国际注册 WO;不接受多国列表。文本本地配置支持:AR, AT, AU, AZ, BR, CA, CN, CZ, DZ, ES, EU, FI, FR, GE, HR, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR, MX, NO, NZ, PL, PT, PY, RO, SG, SK, TW, UA, UK, US, VN, WO。实际文本检索合作方路由为 BX/DE/ES/IT/TR;BX 未列入覆盖快照,覆盖未验证。编号/权利人工具仅查本地源,能力与文本检索不同。历史图形接口还接受 USPAT 等设计库代码,返回专利图形候选,不代表商标国家覆盖。图形以 coverage_info 的 graphic_served 和实际后端可用性为准,可能有 ARIPO/OAPI 等地区代码。"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses coverage limitations, static snapshot/fallback behavior, warning/scope/clearance_ok semantics, count meaning, visual_similarity caveats, TRO/enforcement caveats, and official-source limits extensively.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the description is a sprawling wall of caveats with duplicated country-code details from the schema and repeated legal warnings. Much information is useful, but it is not appropriately sized or tightly structured.

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?

For a no-annotation, no-output-schema, high-complexity legal search tool, it supplies the return shape, country coverage routing, coverage_info prerequisite, and critical caveats. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly and interpret results cautiously.

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 low at 25%, so the description has to compensate. It explains image_url (publicly accessible PNG/JPG), nice_class optionality, limit default, and country code rules/coverage; it omits limits/bounds for limit and nice_class format examples.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: query graphic trademark data by target country and return visually similar candidates. The use case ('卖家查自家 Logo/图案是否撞已注册图形商标') further distinguishes it from sibling tools like trademark_text_search.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear context (seller logo conflict checks) and operational guidance: call coverage_info first, use single country codes, and treat no-hit/clearance_ok cautiously. It differentiates from serial/owner tools and text search only indirectly rather than naming a sibling alternative for text-based lookups, so not a full 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.