Etymolt — Brand Name Verifier
Description
Verifies any brand name across USPTO trademarks, domains, and 14 social handles. Sub-3s. Citation-backed. The verification layer LLMs call before suggesting a brand name. When a user asks Claude, Cursor, ChatGPT, or any LLM-driven workflow for naming help, the model invokes Etymolt silently — verifying against USPTO trademarks, TTAB precedent, domain availability across 8 TLDs, and live handle probes across 14 social platforms — in 3 seconds, with every flag traced. **Three tools, anonymous-first** (first 5 calls per IP free, no API key required): - `verify_brand_name` — 5-axis verdict on one candidate (PROCEED / DUE_DILIGENCE / ITERATE / ABANDON, 0–100 score across trademark + domain + cultural + sound symbolism + pronunciation). 8–12s. - `compare_brand_names` — side-by-side ranking of 2–5 finalists. ~5s. - `get_naming_methodology` — public methodology document. Instant, no quota. **Data substrate**: 12.7M live US trademarks (USPTO, refreshed daily) + 647K TTAB proceedings with Du
What our measurements say
Etymolt — Brand Name Verifier is a remote MCP server published at api.etymolt.com. It has been probed 6 times since 9/10/2026. It answered in 6 of them (100.0%), a near-uninterrupted record. Median response time is 484 ms, placing it among the faster endpoints. It offers a narrow, focused set of 3 tools. On the protocol side it still runs 2025-11-25 and has not moved to the newer spec.
Agent readability score
Can an LLM agent pick the right tool here — names, descriptions and parameter clarity are assessed.
Agent readability score
Strengths
- Tool names clearly indicate their primary functions.
- Descriptions include usage scenarios for compare_brand_names.
Weaknesses
- Descriptions are cut off mid-sentence in all tools.
- No explicit parameter definitions or input schema details provided.
- No error handling or constraint documentation mentioned.
verify_brand_name— Description cuts off mid-sentence, missing critical details about axescompare_brand_names— Incomplete description with abrupt ending after 'Do NOT use this'get_naming_methodology— Description ends mid-sentence without explaining methodology details
Verdict
Event narrative
Risk: medium
- 2026-09-10T21:16:35.016Z — era changed from auth-gated to legacy · indicates compliance monitoring started
- 2026-09-11T05:44:28.819Z — complianceScore rose from null to 100 · shows full regulatory compliance achieved
Advice
Schema compliance
tools/list structure, inputSchema validity, and a functional smoke test — the components of the 0-100 score.
- tools/list schema valid
- inputSchema is valid JSON Schema
- Smoke test not run this round
- Cold-start: cold 186ms → warm 215ms (penalty 0ms)
Availability history
Event log
Derived by comparing consecutive probes — changes in era, protocol version, build and reachability.
- Server build: — → 2.0.3
- Supported versions: — → 2025-03-26
- Era changed: Auth-gated → Legacy
- Added to watch — era: Auth-gated
Get your badge
Add this badge to your README — it updates automatically as measurements change.
[](https://mcpmetrics.io/servers/etymolt-mcp-server)<a href="https://mcpmetrics.io/servers/etymolt-mcp-server"><img src="https://mcpmetrics.io/badge/etymolt/mcp-server/era.svg" alt="mcpmetrics"></a>You are seeing the last 7 days. Sign up for the full history. Which check failed and why is in the dashboard.
Sign up free to see