Skip to main content
Glama

GleanMark Trademark Search

by com.gleanmark

Marks for a Correspondent

get_correspondent_marks
Read-only

Get all trademarks handled by a specific attorney/correspondent, with prosecution event counts and office action flags. Returns marks sorted by prosecution history length. Use this for attorney-specific mark queries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum marks to return.
search_termNoAttorney name to search for (e.g., "Todd Schneider"). Will find the best match.
status_filterNoFilter marks by status.all
correspondent_idNoAlias for canonical_correspondent_id.
correspondent_nameNoAlias for search_term. Preferred when the caller already knows this is a correspondent name.
recent_window_daysNoHow many days back to count recent office actions. Use 90 for "last 3 months".
canonical_correspondent_idNoUUID of the correspondent (from search_attorneys result). Use this if you already have the ID.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by stating the sort order ('sorted by prosecution history length') and the inclusion of event counts and office action flags, going beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by return characteristics and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description effectively conveys the tool's scope and output characteristics, including sort order and included data types. It does not detail return fields or parameter selection logic, but the schema covers parameter semantics, and the annotations handle safety, making this sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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%, with all seven parameters having descriptions. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, but it does reinforce that search_term/correspondent_name relate to attorney identity, matching the tool's purpose.

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 description clearly states the tool retrieves all trademarks handled by a specific attorney/correspondent, including prosecution event counts and office action flags. The phrase 'attorney-specific mark queries' distinguishes it from general trademark search tools like search_trademarks.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this for attorney-specific mark queries,' providing a clear when-to-use context. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the use case is specific enough.

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

All GleanMark Trademark Search toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly defined scopes, but several search/count tools overlap (search_trademarks, phonetic_search, run_knockout_search, get_similar_marks) and owner/firm analytics tools have similar boundaries. Descriptions help differentiate them, but the large set increases the chance of misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_, search_, run_, analyze_, etc.). The only minor deviation is web_research, which is noun_verb, but it remains perfectly readable and consistent with the overall style.

Tool Count1/5

61 tools is extreme for any server, far exceeding the 50+ threshold. Even for a comprehensive trademark platform, this number overwhelms agents with selection complexity and makes the toolset difficult to navigate.

Completeness2/5

Several tools launch asynchronous processes and instruct users to call status tools (get_prosecution_history_status, get_ttab_proceeding_analysis_status, get_office_action_research_status) that are not present in the toolset. Additionally, search_trademarks and phonetic_search reference list_marks_containing_term, which is also missing. These critical gaps cause agent failures when following the described workflows.

Resources