Patent Claims Analyzer Skill
Automated analysis of patent claims for USPTO compliance with 35 USC 112(b) requirements.
When to Use
Invoke this skill when users ask to:
- Review patent claims for definiteness
- Check antecedent basis in claims
- Analyze claim structure
- Find claim drafting issues
- Validate claims before filing
- Fix USPTO office action issues related to claims
What This Skill Does
Performs comprehensive automated analysis:
-
Antecedent Basis Checking:
- Finds terms used without prior introduction
- Detects missing "a/an" before first use
- Identifies improper "said/the" before first use
- Tracks term references across claims
-
Definiteness Analysis (35 USC 112(b)):
- Identifies subjective/indefinite terms
- Detects relative terms without reference
- Finds ambiguous claim language
- Checks for clear claim boundaries
-
Claim Structure Validation:
- Parses independent vs. dependent claims
- Validates claim dependencies
- Checks claim numbering
- Identifies claim type (method, system, etc.)
-
Issue Categorization:
- Critical: Must fix before filing
- Important: May cause rejection
- Minor: Best practice improvements
Required Data
This skill uses the automated claims analyzer from:
Location: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/python\claims_analyzer.py
How to Use
When this skill is invoked:
-
Load the claims analyzer:
pythonimport os import sys sys.path.insert(0, os.environ.get('CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT', '.')) from mcp_server.claims_analyzer import ClaimsAnalyzer analyzer = ClaimsAnalyzer() -
Analyze claims:
pythonclaims_text = """ 1. A system comprising: a processor; a memory; and said processor configured to... """ results = analyzer.analyze_claims(claims_text) -
Present analysis:
- Show compliance score (0-100)
- List issues by severity (critical, important, minor)
- Provide MPEP citations for each issue
- Suggest specific fixes
Analysis Output Structure
python{ "claim_count": 20, "independent_count": 3, "dependent_count": 17, "compliance_score": 85, # 0-100 "total_issues": 12, "critical_issues": 2, "important_issues": 7, "minor_issues": 3, "issues": [ { "category": "antecedent_basis", "severity": "critical", "claim_number": 1, "term": "said processor", "description": "Term 'processor' used with 'said' before first introduction", "mpep_cite": "MPEP 2173.05(e)", "suggestion": "Change 'said processor' to 'the processor' or introduce with 'a processor' first" }, # ... more issues ] }
Common Issues Detected
-
Antecedent Basis Errors:
- Using "said/the" before "a/an" introduction
- Terms appearing in dependent claims not in parent
- Missing antecedent in claim body
-
Definiteness Issues:
- Subjective terms: "substantially", "about", "approximately"
- Relative terms: "large", "small", "thin"
- Ambiguous language: "and/or", "optionally"
-
Structure Issues:
- Means-plus-function without adequate structure
- Improper claim dependencies
- Missing preamble or transition
Presentation Format
Present analysis as:
CLAIMS ANALYSIS REPORT ====================== Summary: - Total Claims: 20 (3 independent, 17 dependent) - Compliance Score: 85/100 - Issues Found: 12 (2 critical, 7 important, 3 minor) CRITICAL ISSUES (Must Fix): [Claim 1] Antecedent Basis Error Issue: Term 'processor' used with 'said' before introduction Location: "said processor configured to..." MPEP: 2173.05(e) Fix: Change to 'the processor' or introduce with 'a processor' first [Claim 5] Indefinite Term Issue: Subjective term 'substantially' without definition Location: "substantially similar to..." MPEP: 2173.05(b) Fix: Define 'substantially' in specification or use objective criteria IMPORTANT ISSUES: ... MINOR ISSUES: ...
Integration with MPEP
For each issue, the skill can:
- Search MPEP for relevant guidance
- Provide specific MPEP section citations
- Show examiner guidance on similar issues
- Suggest fixes based on USPTO practice
Tools Available
- Read: To load claims from files
- Bash: To run Python analyzer
- Write: To save analysis reports


