Epo Ops

Get Biblio

get_biblio

Read-onlyIdempotent

Bibliographic data for one published patent — title, inventors, applicants, publication date, IPC classifications. Drawn from EPO DOCDB, which covers 100+ patent offices, so Chinese, Japanese, Korean, US and PCT/WO publications resolve as well as European ones. A PCT international application (a "WO" publication number) is answered the same as any other — this is NOT the International Search Report or Written Opinion, which EPO OPS does not carry at all; for those, go to WIPO PATENTSCOPE (patentscope.wipo.int). Give the publication number as printed on the document; a trailing kind code such as the "A" in "CN117928705A" is handled for you.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`number`	Yes	Publication number as printed on the document, e.g. "EP1234567", "CN117928705A", "US10000000", or a PCT international publication like "WO2025028566" / "WO 2025/028566" / "WO2025028566A1". Spaces, commas and slashes are ignored, and a trailing kind code (the "A" / "A1" / "B1" suffix) is retried without it if the exact form is not indexed.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`found`	No
`publications`	No
`resolved_number`	No
`requested_number`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 20, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / number / description

Previous value: -"Publication number as printed on the document, e.g. \"EP1234567\", \"CN117928705A\", \"US10000000\". Spaces, commas and slashes are ignored, and a trailing kind code (the \"A\" / \"A1\" / \"B1\" suffix) is retried without it if the exact form is not indexed."New value: +"Publication number as printed on the document, e.g. \"EP1234567\", \"CN117928705A\", \"US10000000\", or a PCT international publication like \"WO2025028566\" / \"WO 2025/028566\" / \"WO2025028566A1\". Spaces, commas and slashes are ignored, and a trailing kind code (the \"A\" / \"A1\" / \"B1\" suffix) is retried without it if the exact form is not indexed."

Changed10 schema fields changedOct 1, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / application-reference

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Application reference details",
-  "type": "object"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / classifications-ipcr

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "IPC classifications",
-  "type": "object"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / found
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

removedOutput schema / properties / invention-title

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Title of the invention",
-  "type": "object"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / parties

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Inventors, applicants, and other parties",
-  "type": "object"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / priority-claims

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Priority claim information",
-  "type": "object"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / publication-reference

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Publication reference including number, date, status",
-  "type": "object"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / publications

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "abstract": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "applicants": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "country": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "family_id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "inventors": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "ipc_classifications": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "kind": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "publication_date": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "publication_number": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "title": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / requested_number
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / resolved_number
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 6, 2026

changedInput schema / examples

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "number": "EP1234567"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "number": "EP1234567"
+  },
+  {
+    "number": "CN117928705A"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / number / description

Previous value: -"Patent number in epodoc format, e.g. \"EP1234567\""New value: +"Publication number as printed on the document, e.g. \"EP1234567\", \"CN117928705A\", \"US10000000\". Spaces, commas and slashes are ignored, and a trailing kind code (the \"A\" / \"A1\" / \"B1\" suffix) is retried without it if the exact form is not indexed."

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 22, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "number": "EP1234567"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Bibliographic data for a patent",
+  "properties": {
+    "application-reference": {
+      "description": "Application reference details",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "classifications-ipcr": {
+      "description": "IPC classifications",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "invention-title": {
+      "description": "Title of the invention",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "parties": {
+      "description": "Inventors, applicants, and other parties",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "priority-claims": {
+      "description": "Priority claim information",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "publication-reference": {
+      "description": "Publication reference including number, date, status",
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: the data source (EPO DOCDB), its 100+ office coverage (CN/JP/KR/US/PCT resolving as well as EP), and that PCT 'WO' numbers are handled like any other publication.

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?

Purpose and returned fields are front-loaded in the first sentence, and the input-format note closes it well. The ISR/WIPO-PATENTSCOPE digression is useful routing information but runs slightly long relative to the single-parameter simplicity of the tool.

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 an output schema present, return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers everything else an agent needs: what it returns, the data source and its coverage, that PCT publications are in scope, what it is not, and how to format the input. Nothing material is missing for a one-parameter lookup.

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% and the property description is already detailed, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value by telling the agent to supply the number 'as printed on the document' and confirming that a trailing kind code is handled for you, which reduces input-format errors rather than merely restating the schema.

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+resource: 'Bibliographic data for one published patent', then enumerates exactly which fields it returns (title, inventors, applicants, publication date, IPC classifications). This cleanly separates it from siblings like get_abstract, get_claims, get_family, and get_legal_status, which cover different facets of the same publication.

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?

It gives an explicit when-not with an alternative: it is NOT the International Search Report or Written Opinion, and routes the agent to WIPO PATENTSCOPE for those. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over the sibling field-level tools (get_abstract, get_claims) for the same patent, leaving that to inference from the name.

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

All Epo Ops 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.