European IP Data & Analytics — IPRATE

Check IPRATE data coverage

get_iprate_coverage

Read-onlyIdempotent

Explain which static release cohorts support a jurisdiction and IP-right question. Returns held, partial, or not-covered state, release assets, counts, and supported fields.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tier`	No	Optional released national or European route.
`right_type`	No	Optional IP right type.
`jurisdiction`	No	Optional ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code, or EU for the European route.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Tool result. Which fields are present depends on status.
`as_of`	Yes	Generation time of the selected static release.
`links`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`coverage`	Yes
`release_id`	Yes
`limitations`	Yes
`source_urls`	Yes	Public URLs to cite.
`server_version`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "as_of": {
+      "description": "Generation time of the selected static release.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "coverage": {
+      "properties": {
+        "availability": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "error_type": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "exclusions": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "hold_state": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "jurisdiction": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "right_type": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "static_assets": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "tier": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Tool result. Which fields are present depends on status.",
+      "properties": {
+        "cohorts": {
+          "items": {
+            "properties": {
+              "jurisdiction": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "published_at": {
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "right_type": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "run_id": {
+                "type": [
+                  "number",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "status": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "tier": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "windows": {
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "hold_state": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "holdings": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "description": "Explanation when status is not ok.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "published_profile_counts": {
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "supported_field_groups": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "limitations": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "links": {
+      "properties": {
+        "explore": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "methodology": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "request_analysis": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "release_id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "server_version": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source_urls": {
+      "description": "Public URLs to cite.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "ok",
+        "no_results",
+        "ambiguous",
+        "not_public",
+        "not_covered",
+        "source_unavailable",
+        "invalid_request"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "data",
+    "as_of",
+    "release_id",
+    "coverage",
+    "limitations",
+    "source_urls",
+    "links",
+    "server_version"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's added behavioral value is the tri-state semantics (held / partial / not-covered), but it then spends its remaining budget listing return fields that the existing output schema already documents.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two tight sentences with no padding, and the purpose is front-loaded before the return-value list. The second sentence is largely a restatement of the output schema, which costs a little, but the overall size is appropriate.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With an output schema and full annotations present, the description only needs to carry intent; it does that. However, it leaves gaps on how this capability check relates to the other IP tools and on the fact that all parameters are optional (i.e. what a call with no arguments returns).

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% and all three parameters carry their own descriptions plus enums for tier and right_type, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only gestures at 'jurisdiction and IP-right question' and adds no format, default, or combination semantics beyond that (e.g. that tier and right_type are optional filters).

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?

States a concrete verb (explain/check support) and a specific resource (static release cohort coverage for a jurisdiction + IP-right question), and enumerates the resulting states. It is clear what the tool answers, though it never names or contrasts a sibling tool such as get_ip_market_snapshot or search.

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?

Usage is only implied: the notion of coverage states suggests a preflight/capability check before running a data query, but the description never says when to call this instead of the siblings (fetch, search, get_ip_market_snapshot). No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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

All European IP Data & Analytics — IPRATE 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.