Skip to main content
Glama
riemannzeta

USPTO Patent MCP Server

by riemannzeta
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

tm_search_assignments

Read-onlyIdempotent

Trace trademark ownership history and find current owners by searching USPTO assignment records from 1955 to present. Filter by serial number, assignee, assignor, or reel/frame.

Instructions

Search recorded trademark assignment (ownership transfer) records.

USE THIS TOOL WHEN: You need to trace ownership history of a trademark,
find the current owner, or find marks transferred to/from a company.
Covers recorded assignments from 1955 to present, via the USPTO
Assignment Center public API (no API key required).

At least one filter is required; multiple filters combine (AND).

Args:
    serial_number: Trademark application serial number
    registration_number: Trademark registration number
    assignee_name: Assignee (new owner) name
    assignor_name: Assignor (previous owner) name
    reel_frame: Recordation reel/frame identifier (e.g., "9006/0093")
    offset: Starting position for pagination (default: 0)
    limit: Maximum results to return (default: 25)

Returns:
    Normalized response with assignment records (reel/frame, assignors,
    assignees, conveyance, and affected properties).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo
reel_frameNo
assignee_nameNo
assignor_nameNo
serial_numberNo
registration_numberNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.8.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "object"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "tm_search_assignmentsOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 genuinely new behavior: the 1955–present coverage window, that no API key is required, and the critical constraint that at least one filter is required with filters ANDed together. It still says nothing about rate limits, result caps, or failure modes, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and usage in the first three lines, then cleanly sectioned Args/Returns. Every line adds information an agent needs; the parameter list is not a restatement of the schema since those fields have zero descriptions in the schema.

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 no output schema, the description compensates with a Returns block describing the normalized record shape (reel/frame, assignors, assignees, conveyance, affected properties). Combined with the required-filter rule and full parameter coverage, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden — and it does: all seven parameters are documented, including the non-obvious semantics that assignee_name is the new owner and assignor_name the previous owner, a concrete reel_frame format example ('9006/0093'), and pagination defaults for offset/limit.

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 precise verb and resource ('Search recorded trademark assignment (ownership transfer) records') and disambiguates the legal meaning of 'assignment' with a parenthetical. The scope statement (recorded assignments 1955–present via USPTO Assignment Center) lets an agent separate it from the patent-side assignment siblings without opening the 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?

The 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' block gives three concrete scenarios (trace ownership history, find current owner, find marks transferred to/from a company), which is clear positive guidance. However, it names no alternative tool and gives no when-not conditions, so routing decisions against siblings like tm_search_trademarks are left to inference.

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