GleanMark Trademark Search

Top Trademark Filers

get_top_filers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a ranked filer table for a date range, filer type, and optional Nice classes. Handles questions like "Who are the top 10 filers in Class 9 in 2025?" Returns ranked rows with per-filer live, registered, and pending counts plus corpus totals. A single call covers the full ranked list: limit (up to 100) sets the number of rows and the date range may span multiple years. offset reaches ranks beyond 100 or a specific band (ranks 40-45 = limit: 6, offset: 39).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum number of ranked filers to return. Up to 100 in a single call.
`offset`	No	Rank to start from, 0-based. Use with limit to reach deeper bands: ranks 40-45 are limit 6, offset 39. Ranks in the response already account for this.
`rank_by`	No	What to order by. 'filings' is raw volume and is dominated by high-volume online filing services. 'success_rate' ranks by registrations as a share of DECIDED outcomes (registered vs abandoned), which surfaces quality rather than throughput. Every response carries success_rate_percent and supplemental_percent regardless of ordering.	filings
`end_date`	Yes	Inclusive end date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`filer_type`	No	Whether to rank owners, law firms, or individual correspondents.	owner
`start_date`	Yes	Inclusive start date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`min_filings`	No	Minimum filings a filer needs to appear. Defaults to 25 when rank_by is success_rate, 0 otherwise. Required for rate rankings: without a floor a filer with 2 marks and 2 registrations scores 100% and outranks a firm that won 900 of 1,000.
`nice_classes`	No	Optional Nice classes to filter by. Use integers like 42 or 9.
`filer_profile`	No	Restrict to a kind of filer. Firm rankings only. 'filing_service' is a curated, human-verified list of productized high-volume filing operations (LegalZoom, Rocket Lawyer, Swyft and similar) — use 'law_firm' to EXCLUDE them, which is what a user means by "exclude the agencies/factories". 'full_service' is a law firm that litigates (files TTAB oppositions/cancellations); 'prosecution_only' is a law firm that mostly does not — that is practice scope, NOT a judgment about quality, and prosecution-only firms are entirely legitimate. 'in_house' is a company's own trademark department (Mattel, Disney), not a firm serving clients.	all

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`end_date`	Yes
`headline`	Yes
`returned`	Yes
`filer_type`	Yes
`start_date`	Yes
`leader_name`	No
`nice_classes`	Yes
`presentation`	Yes
`leader_detail_url`	No
`leader_filing_count`	Yes
`total_matching_filers`	Yes
`total_matching_filings`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedAug 31, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / filer_profile

Added value: +{
+  "default": "all",
+  "description": "Restrict to a kind of filer. Firm rankings only. 'filing_service' is a curated, human-verified list of productized high-volume filing operations (LegalZoom, Rocket Lawyer, Swyft and similar) — use 'law_firm' to EXCLUDE them, which is what a user means by \"exclude the agencies/factories\". 'full_service' is a law firm that litigates (files TTAB oppositions/cancellations); 'prosecution_only' is a law firm that mostly does not — that is practice scope, NOT a judgment about quality, and prosecution-only firms are entirely legitimate. 'in_house' is a company's own trademark department (Mattel, Disney), not a firm serving clients.",
+  "enum": [
+    "all",
+    "law_firm",
+    "full_service",
+    "prosecution_only",
+    "filing_service",
+    "in_house"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / min_filings

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Minimum filings a filer needs to appear. Defaults to 25 when rank_by is success_rate, 0 otherwise. Required for rate rankings: without a floor a filer with 2 marks and 2 registrations scores 100% and outranks a firm that won 900 of 1,000.",
+  "maximum": 100000,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / rank_by

Added value: +{
+  "default": "filings",
+  "description": "What to order by. 'filings' is raw volume and is dominated by high-volume online filing services. 'success_rate' ranks by registrations as a share of DECIDED outcomes (registered vs abandoned), which surfaces quality rather than throughput. Every response carries success_rate_percent and supplemental_percent regardless of ordering.",
+  "enum": [
+    "filings",
+    "registrations",
+    "success_rate"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedAug 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / limit / description

Previous value: -"Maximum number of ranked filers to return."New value: +"Maximum number of ranked filers to return. Up to 100 in a single call."

changedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Previous value: -25New value: +100
```

addedInput schema / properties / offset

Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Rank to start from, 0-based. Use with limit to reach deeper bands: ranks 40-45 are limit 6, offset 39. Ranks in the response already account for this.",
+  "maximum": 10000,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

AddedJul 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: it returns per-filer live/registered/pending counts plus corpus totals, explains limit/offset for rank bands, describes success_rate and the min_filings floor to prevent skewed rankings, and clarifies filer_profile semantics including the curated filing-service list and how to exclude them. This goes well 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 that front-load the core purpose, then give a usage example, then explain pagination. Each sentence earns its place with zero filler or repetition.

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?

With 9 parameters, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it covers date ranges, filer types, Nice classes, pagination, ranking options, and behavioral caveats. The output schema handles return structure, so the description doesn't need to; the only gap is explicit sibling differentiation, which belongs more to usage guidelines.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description enriches limit/offset with a concrete example (ranks 40-45 = limit 6, offset 39) and clarifies that a single call covers the full ranked list. Most parameter-specific nuances (e.g., filer_profile meanings) are already in the schema, so the description supplements rather than compensates.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Get a ranked filer table') and specifies the scope (date range, filer type, Nice classes). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_ttab_top_opposition_filers or get_firm_top_correspondents by being a general top-filers ranking tool, so an agent can immediately tell what it does.

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 gives a concrete example ('Who are the top 10 filers in Class 9 in 2025?') and implies when to use it for ranked-filer questions. However, it never explicitly contrasts with sibling tools or states when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer the boundary against specialized alternatives.

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 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?