Skip to main content
Glama
pangolinfo

PangolinFo Amazon Ad Tracker & Review Intelligence

Official
by pangolinfo

wipo_search

Search WIPO global design database to check design patent infringement risks and competitor IP layouts across 12 sources like USPTO and CNID.

Instructions

[WIPO 全球外观设计 / 商标检索] 查 WIPO 全球外观设计数据库(USPTO 美国外观、CNID 中国、HAGUE 海牙国际注册等 12 个 source)。 Use when: 用户说"查商标""查外观专利""新品有没有侵权风险""X 公司的专利布局""WIPO 检索""USPTO 查询""DM/XXX 这个国际注册号是什么";选品 / GTM SOP 里立项前的 IP 风险排查;竞品 IP 布局调研。 Don't use: 想查关键词排名 / 商品评论 / 商品详情(这是 IP 数据库,不是商品库);只想要美国注册商标文字检索(这个数据库主要是外观设计,文字商标覆盖有限)。 Returns: data.data.{ total, hits[{ IRN, HOL[], DETAIL_DATA.structured.{indication_of_products, statement_of_novelty, ...}, IMG[], IMG_DATA[{filename,url}], DC, RD, STATUS, LCS[], DS[], PROD[], SOURCE, DETAIL_URL }] }。 Pair with: ↑ 必填 source;hol=权利人 / prod=产品名 / irn=国际注册号 / lcs=洛迦诺分类号;↓ DETAIL_URL 可让用户跳转 WIPO 官网核查。 Cost: ~2 积点/次, ~5s。 ⚠️ 性能契约: CNID + hol/prod 必须配 id/idSearch/rd/status/lcs 至少一项(否则 17M 行全表扫描会被拒);JPID 无 HOL/PROD 字段;USID 无 STATUS 字段;ed (过期日期) 在所有 source 都被忽略,要按日期筛用 rd。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sourceYes数据来源(必填)。WIPO 数据按 source 分区存储,跨 source 不可查。常用:USID(美国外观)、CNID(中国外观,17M+ 条)、HAGUE(海牙体系国际注册)、DEID、JPID。
dsNo指定国家代码(如 'US'、'CN')。可选——传 source 时通常已隐含国家。
holNo权利人(公司或个人)名称模糊匹配。Examples: 'Apple' / 'Samsung' / 'Nike'。注意:CNID + hol 必须配合 id/idSearch/rd/status/lcs 至少一项;JPID 无 HOL 字段(会被忽略)。
prodNo产品名称模糊匹配。CNID 搜中文,其他 source 搜英文。Examples: '椅子' (CNID) / 'wireless headphones' (USID) / 'iphone case' (USID)。CNID + prod 必须配合 id/idSearch/rd/status/lcs;JPID 无 PROD 字段。
irnNo国际注册号精确匹配。Examples: 'DM/000298'(HAGUE)/ 'D1107730'(USID)。
idNo完整 ID 精确匹配,如 'CNID.2023.123456'。用于 CNID 路由到单分区,避免全表扫描。
idSearchNoID 变体模糊匹配。
rdNo注册日期(YYYY 或 YYYY-MM-DD)。CNID 必备的窄化字段之一,能把查询路由到年份分区。
statusNo法律状态:'ACT'(生效)、'EXP'(过期)等。USID 无 STATUS 字段(会被忽略)。
lcsNo洛迦诺分类号(外观设计国际分类),如 '23-01' = 流体分配设备。
fromNo分页起始位置,从 0 开始。
numNo每页条数(默认 10,上限 100)。
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses cost (~2 credits/call), latency (~5s), performance contract (CNID+hol rejection without additional filters), source-specific field omissions (JPID no HOL/PROD, USID no STATUS), and that 'ed' is ignored. Sufficient for safe invocation.

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?

Description is lengthy but well-structured with sections (Use when, Don't use, Returns, Pair with, Cost, Performance contract). Slightly verbose for a tool description, but every sentence adds value given complexity (12 params, multiple sources).

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?

Despite no output schema, description details return structure (data.data.total, hits with fields like IRN, HOL, IMG, STATUS). Covers edge cases (source-specific field absence, performance contracts). Completely addresses tool's complexity.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds significant value beyond schema: examples for each parameter (e.g., 'Apple' for hol, 'DM/000298' for irn), source-specific notes (JPID ignores hol/prod, CNID requires composite queries), and performance implications.

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?

Description states tool is for searching WIPO global design/trademark databases, listing 12 sources. Specifies verb '查' (search) and resource. Clearly differentiates from siblings (Amazon, Google, etc.) which are all product/market 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?

Explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use' sections with concrete user queries and scenarios. Pairs with required parameter combinations and explains source-specific restrictions (e.g., CNID+hol must combine).

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/pangolinfo/pangolinfo-mcp'

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