Skip to main content
Glama
milaniseb12-png

inpi-marcas-mcp-server

by milaniseb12-png
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Buscar marca por texto (exata ou radical)

inpi_search_by_mark
Read-onlyIdempotent

Searches INPI's pePI trademark database by mark text to check if a name is already registered and identify its holders. Filter results by Nice Classification.

Instructions

Busca marcas no pePI (INPI oficial) pelo texto da marca, igual à aba "Marca" do site oficial. Suporta busca exata (o termo inteiro) ou por radical (o termo aparece em qualquer parte do nome). Pode filtrar por Classificação de Nice.

Use esta busca para descobrir se um nome já está registrado e quem são os titulares. Para busca mais avançada com apresentação, natureza ou operadores booleanos, use inpi_search_by_mark_advanced.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marcaYesTexto da marca a buscar, ex: GOOGLE
busca_exataNotrue = busca exata; false = busca por radical (contém o texto)
classe_niceNoFiltra pela Classificação de Nice, ex: 09, 42
salvar_htmlNotrue = também salva o resultado como um relatório HTML legível (tabela, sem depender de MCP) em disco e devolve o caminho do arquivo.
salvar_evidenciaNotrue = grava um PACOTE DE EVIDÊNCIA bruta em disco (HTML original do pePI, cópia offline com imagens/CSS baixados, manifest com sha256 de cada arquivo) — pra prova/auditoria, não só leitura. Diferente de salvar_html (que é só um relatório bonito). Sempre vai ao pePI ao vivo, ignorando o cache, porque a evidência precisa do HTML da requisição real.
forcar_atualizacaoNoIgnora o cache local (padrão 6h) e busca de novo no pePI ao vivo.
resultados_por_paginaNoResultados por página. Valores aceitos pelo pePI: 20, 40, 60, 80, 100.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / salvar_evidencia
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "true = grava um PACOTE DE EVIDÊNCIA bruta em disco (HTML original do pePI, cópia offline com imagens/CSS baixados, manifest com sha256 de cada arquivo) — pra prova/auditoria, não só leitura. Diferente de salvar_html (que é só um relatório bonito). Sempre vai ao pePI ao vivo, ignorando o cache, porque a evidência precisa do HTML da requisição real.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context: it queries the official INPI pePI source, supports exact/radical matching, and is intended to reveal registration status and titulars. It omits caching/rate-limit details, but those are covered in the schema.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short paragraphs front-load purpose and search modes, then give usage and the sibling alternative. Every sentence supports tool selection or parameter understanding, with no wasted text.

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?

For a read-only search tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies source, search modes, Nice filter, intended discovery use, and an explicit alternative. It is complete enough for an agent to call correctly; return details are reasonably implied.

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 all seven parameters are documented in the schema. The description repeats the main search semantics (exact/radical and Nice filter) but adds little syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 'Busca marcas' and resource 'pePI (INPI oficial)' by mark text, and distinguishes exact versus radical search plus Nice filter. It also names the advanced sibling for broader scope, so an agent can differentiate the tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says to use this search to discover whether a name is registered and who the titulars are. It also states that for advanced search with apresentação, natureza, or boolean operators, use inpi_search_by_mark_advanced, providing a clear alternative.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools