Skip to main content
Glama

Euipo Search Designs

euipo_search_designs
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search registered Community designs (RCD) at the EUIPO — "find registered EU designs owned by Adidas in Locarno class 02". Use for design-filing landscape and competitor design portfolios. Returns matching designs (design number, indication of product, status, owner, Locarno classes, filing date) plus raw. Example: euipo_search_designs({ owner: "adidas", locarno_classes: ["02"] })

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoZero-based page index for pagination (default 0).
sizeNoMax results per page (default 20, max 100).
ownerNoDesign owner / applicant name to match, e.g. "adidas".
queryNoAdvanced: raw RSQL filter passed through verbatim (e.g. indicationOfProduct=="*footwear*";locarnoClasses=in=(02)). Overrides the friendly params above.
statusNoDesign status filter, e.g. "REGISTERED", "EXPIRED". Comma-separate for multiple.
_apiKeyNoOptional: your own EUIPO client_id:client_secret; Pipeworx supplies one if omitted.
indicationNoIndication of product / design keyword to match (wildcards added automatically), e.g. "footwear".
locarno_classesNoLocarno classification classes to filter by, e.g. ["02", "09"].

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / examples
      Previous value: -[
      -  {
      -    "_apiKey": "your-euipo-client-id:your-euipo-client-secret",
      -    "locarno_classes": [
      -      "02"
      -    ],
      -    "owner": "adidas",
      -    "status": "REGISTERED"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "_apiKey": "your-euipo-client-id:your-euipo-client-secret",
      -    "indication": "footwear",
      -    "locarno_classes": [
      -      "09"
      -    ]
      -  }
      -]New value: +[
      +  {
      +    "locarno_classes": [
      +      "02"
      +    ],
      +    "owner": "adidas",
      +    "status": "REGISTERED"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "indication": "footwear",
      +    "locarno_classes": [
      +      "09"
      +    ]
      +  }
      +]
    • changedInput schema / properties / _apiKey / description
      Previous value: -"EUIPO OAuth credentials as \"client_id:client_secret\" from dev.euipo.europa.eu."New value: +"Optional: your own EUIPO client_id:client_secret; Pipeworx supplies one if omitted."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "_apiKey"
      -]New value: +[]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful value by enumerating the returned fields (design number, product indication, status, owner, Locarno classes, filing date) plus 'raw', which matters since there is no output schema, but it says nothing about result volume, pagination limits, or credential behaviour beyond what the schema's _apiKey entry already covers.

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 is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by use case, return shape, then an example — a sensible ordering with little padding. The prose example and the explicit function-call example partially duplicate each other, which is the only waste.

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 an eight-parameter, no-required-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, use case, return fields and a worked example, which is close to sufficient. It omits pagination/result-volume expectations and what 'raw' actually contains, the main residual gaps.

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%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters including the raw RSQL `query` override and its precedence. The description only demonstrates one combination (owner + locarno_classes) in an example call, adding marginal meaning beyond the structured fields — the 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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'Search registered Community designs (RCD) at the EUIPO' — with the acronym expansion and a concrete illustrative query. The resource (designs) is plainly distinct from the sibling EUIPO tools for trademarks, goods/services, persons and product indications, so an agent can route without opening a schema.

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?

Gives clear intended contexts: 'design-filing landscape and competitor design portfolios', reinforced by the Adidas/Locarno class example. It does not state when to prefer a sibling (e.g. euipo_search_product_indications for keyword-only lookups) or any exclusions, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.