European IP Data & Analytics — IPRATE

Prepare a request for quotes

prepare_quote_request

Use this when the user wants to hire a trade mark representative in Europe. It matches up to three firms with published IPRATE ratings per jurisdiction and returns a link where the user adds contact details and sends the request. Free for the user. Put no personal data in the description.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "jurisdictions": "<jurisdictions>",
      "proceeding": "<proceeding>",
      "classes": "<classes>"
    },
    "name": "prepare_quote_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`classes`	Yes
`deadline`	No
`language`	No
`proceeding`	Yes
`case_number`	No
`case_office`	No
`description`	No	The matter in a few sentences. Leave out names, emails and phone numbers.
`jurisdictions`	Yes	EUIPO, BX (Benelux) or two-letter country codes.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`firms`	No
`ordering_url`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare the generic mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the description adds real value: it explains that the tool produces a link and the user still supplies contact details and sends the request, meaning no outbound message occurs at call time. It also discloses the privacy rule for the description field. It does not cover permissions or failure modes, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the trigger condition, then mechanism, then output, then a privacy caveat. Only 'Free for the user' borders on filler, but it is a genuine decision input, so the text is largely efficient.

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?

An output schema exists and the description still usefully tells the agent a link is returned. However, for an 8-parameter mutation tool with only 25% schema coverage, the description should clarify the required proceeding/classes semantics and the optional case fields; it does not, leaving a meaningful gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 25% across 8 parameters. The description adds meaning only for jurisdictions ('per jurisdiction') and the description field (no personal data); it says nothing about proceeding, classes, deadline, language, case_number, or case_office, leaving most parameters to a bare schema.

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 states a specific action (prepare a quote request) and resource (trade mark representative hiring in Europe), and explains the matching behaviour (up to three firms with published IPRATE ratings per jurisdiction) plus the return (a link). It is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the nearby sibling find_ip_representatives, which an agent could plausibly confuse it with.

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 opening clause gives an explicit trigger: 'Use this when the user wants to hire a trade mark representative in Europe.' It also supplies a usage constraint ('Put no personal data in the description') and the free-to-user fact. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, so it misses the top tier.

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.