Patent Claims Drafting
Draft patent claims from an invention disclosure, generating one independent claim at the broadest defensible scope plus dependent claims with specific implementation details as fallback positions.
Instructions
- Read the instruction file at
${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/prompt.md - Ask the user for the required inputs if not already provided via
$ARGUMENTS:
- Invention title
- Invention description (what it does, how it works, what problem it solves)
- Key difference/innovation (what makes it different from existing solutions)
- Supporting documents (optional)
- Reference claims (optional, from a similar patent for style guidance) - Fill in the
{{PLACEHOLDER}}values with the user's content - Execute the prompt to draft the claims
- Present the output to the user If the user provides a file path or pasted content as
$ARGUMENTS, use that as the invention disclosure and extract the needed fields from it.
Inputs
| Placeholder | What to put here |
|---|---|
{{INVENTION_TITLE}} |
Title of the invention disclosure |
{{INVENTION_DESCRIPTION}} |
Full description of the invention -- what it does, how it works, what problem it solves |
{{KEY_DIFFERENCE}} |
What makes this invention different from existing solutions or prior art |
{{SUPPORTING_DOCUMENTS}} |
Any additional materials -- diagrams, technical specs, etc. Write "None" if not available |
{{REFERENCE_CLAIMS}} |
(Optional) Claims from a similar existing patent to use as a style guide. Use the format below, or remove this section entirely if not needed |
Attribution
Adapted from arcprime-ip/patent-prompts (MIT License) by ArcPrime — <https://github.com/arcprime-ip/patent-prompts>.
Original prompt text is reproduced with the license notice retained. Modifications: repackaged into a
standalone skill with references/prompt.md, bilingual description, and SkillHub metadata.
> This skill produces an analytical aid, not legal advice. Always have a qualified patent
> professional review any output before relying on it.
Scope
Written for US patent practice — USPTO filing and prosecution, 35 U.S.C. §§ 101/102/103/112,
Alice/Mayo eligibility, Graham/KSR obviousness. For CNIPA or EPO practice, the statutory
frameworks differ and the analysis must be adapted.
