Skip to main content
Glama

listing_scan

扫描 listing 的商标风险词。当前后端忽略 country,仅 US 可用;非 US 明确报错,不能声称已扫描目标国家。

用于卖家发品前一键自查整条 listing 标题是否含侵权商标词。
text: listing 标题或文案(可整段)。
nice_class: 尼斯商品类别号,可选。
返回: {summary:{高,中,低}, tro_count, hits:[{mark, risk_level, applicant, tro_alert?}]}。

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
textYes
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
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

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses many behavioral traits: country codes are largely ignored, only US is served, non-US raises errors, and it must not claim to have scanned the target country. It also explains country normalization, routing, coverage caveats, count semantics, TRO/enforcement signals, and source-specific limitations.

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 description is extremely long and rambling, with many sentences about unrelated tools, coverage behavior, and general disclaimers that do not help invoke listing_scan. The purpose is front-loaded, but the remainder is poorly structured and repetitive, so most sentences do not earn their place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description does provide substantial behavioral context, return shape, and caveats. However, it is bloated and omits details such as nice_class format and risk-level thresholds, so it is complete enough but not ideal.

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 coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate; it defines text as a listing title or copy, nice_class as an optional Nice class number, and repeats extensive country semantics. The country detail is already present in the schema, so the description adds little there, but it adequately covers the undocumented text and nice_class parameters.

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 description clearly states a specific verb and resource: scanning a listing for trademark risk words, and it specifies the use case of seller pre-listing self-check of an entire listing title. It does not name or differentiate from sibling tools such as trademark_text_search, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

It gives clear context for use (seller product-listing self-check) and an explicit when-not: the backend ignores country and only US works, with non-US requests erroring. It also instructs calling coverage_info first, but it does not point to alternative tools for non-US scenarios, so not a 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.