Skip to main content
Glama

GleanMark Trademark Search

by com.gleanmark

USPTO Event Code Reference

get_event_code_reference
Read-only

Look up USPTO event codes used in trademark prosecution. Search by exact code, code prefix, or keyword in the event description. Returns the code, human-readable description, and category.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoExact USPTO event code or prefix (e.g., "OAIN" for exact, "OA" for prefix match).
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (default 20).
searchNoKeyword to search in event descriptions (e.g., "office action", "abandoned").

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by stating return fields (code, description, category) and search modes, providing useful context that is not in the annotations. No contradictions with annotations were found.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. The main action is front-loaded, and every phrase adds useful information about search modes or return values. Excellent structure.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, search modes, and return fields. It could mention the default behavior when no parameters are provided, but overall it is complete enough for effective use.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description's mention of 'exact code, code prefix, or keyword' mirrors the schema's parameter descriptions without adding new meaning beyond what is already structured. Baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Look up USPTO event codes used in trademark prosecution.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from generic siblings like get_reference_lookup by focusing on event codes and the trademark prosecution domain.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explains how to search (by exact code, prefix, or keyword) but does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. The phrase 'used in trademark prosecution' implies its context, but no exclusions or comparisons are given.

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