Skip to main content
Glama

get_top_inventors

Identify leading inventors in specific technology fields using patent data. Search by keywords or IPC classification to evaluate top performers or find potential recruits.

Instructions

Shows the top inventors in the technology field. Evaluate top performers or identify potential recruits. Returns up to the top 10 inventors. Note: Search must contain either keywords or IPC. If both are provided, IPC is prioritized.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keywordsNoKeywords to search within patent title and abstract/summary. Supports AND, OR, NOT logic. Example: "mobile phone AND (screen OR battery)"
ipcNoPatent IPC classification code. Used to specify a particular technology field.
apply_start_timeNoPatent application start year (yyyy format). Filters by application filing date.
apply_end_timeNoPatent application end year (yyyy format). Filters by application filing date.
public_start_timeNoPatent publication start year (yyyy format). Filters by publication date.
public_end_timeNoPatent publication end year (yyyy format). Filters by publication date.
authorityNoPatent authority code (e.g., CN, US, EP, JP). Filters by patent office. Use OR for multiple, e.g., "US OR EP".

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function implementing the core logic for the 'get_top_inventors' tool. It constructs search parameters from input args and delegates to the callPatsnapApi helper for the 'inventor-ranking' endpoint.
    async function getTopInventors(args: BasePatentArgs): Promise<ServerResult> {
      const params = buildCommonSearchParams(args);
      // No 'lang' parameter for this endpoint
      return callPatsnapApi('inventor-ranking', params, 'get top inventors');
    }
  • Tool schema registration in the ListToolsRequest handler, defining the name, description, and inputSchema for 'get_top_inventors'.
      name: 'get_top_inventors',
      description: 'Shows the top inventors in the technology field. Evaluate top performers or identify potential recruits. Returns up to the top 10 inventors. Note: Search must contain either keywords or IPC. If both are provided, IPC is prioritized.',
      inputSchema: basePatentInputSchema
    },
  • src/index.ts:399-399 (registration)
    Registration of the tool handler in the toolImplementations dispatch map used by the CallToolRequest handler.
    'get_top_inventors': getTopInventors,
  • Shared basePatentInputSchema object referenced as inputSchema for the 'get_top_inventors' tool and others.
    const basePatentInputSchema = {
        type: 'object' as const, // Use 'as const' for stricter type checking
        properties: {
            keywords: { type: 'string', description: 'Keywords to search within patent title and abstract/summary. Supports AND, OR, NOT logic. Example: "mobile phone AND (screen OR battery)"' },
            ipc: { type: 'string', description: 'Patent IPC classification code. Used to specify a particular technology field.' },
            apply_start_time: { type: 'string', description: 'Patent application start year (yyyy format). Filters by application filing date.' },
            apply_end_time: { type: 'string', description: 'Patent application end year (yyyy format). Filters by application filing date.' },
            public_start_time: { type: 'string', description: 'Patent publication start year (yyyy format). Filters by publication date.' },
            public_end_time: { type: 'string', description: 'Patent publication end year (yyyy format). Filters by publication date.' },
            authority: { type: 'string', description: 'Patent authority code (e.g., CN, US, EP, JP). Filters by patent office. Use OR for multiple, e.g., "US OR EP".' }
        },
        // Add a note about requiring keywords or IPC for most tools
        description: "Requires either 'keywords' or 'ipc' to be specified for a meaningful search. If both are provided, IPC is prioritized by the API."
    };
  • TypeScript type definition for BasePatentArgs used as parameter type in the getTopInventors handler.
    type BasePatentArgs = { keywords?: string; ipc?: string; apply_start_time?: string; apply_end_time?: string; public_start_time?: string; public_end_time?: string; authority?: string };
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals important behavioral traits: returns up to 10 results, requires either keywords or IPC input, and IPC prioritization when both are provided. However, it doesn't disclose other critical behaviors like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or what specific metrics determine 'top' inventors.

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?

The description is appropriately sized with three sentences that each earn their place: purpose statement, use cases, and critical search constraints. It's front-loaded with the core purpose. There's minimal waste, though the second sentence could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given 7 parameters with full schema coverage but no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate but incomplete context. It explains the purpose and key constraints well, but doesn't address what the output looks like (beyond 'top 10 inventors'), how 'top' is determined, or other behavioral aspects that would be helpful for an agent invoking this tool.

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 7 parameters thoroughly. The description adds some value by explaining the mandatory requirement of either keywords or IPC and their prioritization logic, but doesn't provide additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already specifies. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Shows the top inventors in the technology field' with specific verbs ('shows', 'evaluate', 'identify') and resource ('inventors'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_top_assignees by focusing on inventors rather than assignees or other patent metrics. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings in the list.

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 description provides clear context for when to use this tool: 'Evaluate top performers or identify potential recruits' in technology fields. It also specifies a key constraint: 'Search must contain either keywords or IPC' and prioritization rules. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name alternative tools for different needs.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/KunihiroS/patsnap-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server