Discover the Best AI Skills

Translate Chinese patent applications, priority texts, claims, descriptions, abstracts, drawing text, sequence-listing references, or invention disclosures into filing-support drafts for Europe, the United States, Japan, or Korea while preserving source support, claim scope, terminology, and destination-specific patent style. Use for EP, US, JP, or KR patent translation, jurisdiction formatting, terminology reconciliation, or translation QA.

Build an evidence-backed technology-evolution map for a product or technical system using system decomposition, SVOP functional abstraction, parallel patent and literature research, reviewed scoring, a versioned TRIZ-inspired route taxonomy, evolution-forest visualization, and scenario-based forecasts. Use for technology evolution, next-generation product forms, route maps, cross-domain analogies, candidate white spaces, horizon scenarios, gray-rhino pathways, or low-probability disruption signals.

Design and calibrate the Stage 3/4 tagging system for a patent-landscape program. Use after search-patents-ip and analyze-patent-search-results-ip to create a versioned four-column technology taxonomy, decision-relevant technical questions, evidence-backed patent groups, a reviewed tagging demonstration, and a complete empty-tag CSV for genuine human tagging at Stage 3.5; validate the returned tagged_pool.csv before routing to create-patent-search-report-ip.

Build and validate expert patent-search branches for Stage 1/4 of a patent-landscape program. Use when starting create-patent-landscape-overview-ip or when a user needs a reusable, field-scoped, anchored, classification-assisted, de-noised patent search configuration with precision/recall validation, a traceable family-aware candidate pool, a lightweight core-recall set, and a preliminary taxonomy export for later human review.

Search patents owned or filed by one or more specified applicants within a defined technology topic. Use when an IP searcher or analyst needs an applicant-first, topic-constrained PatSnap strategy; evidence-backed assignee expansion; auditable PatSnap formulas; executed retrieval and deduplicated datasets; or a Markdown and Word retrieval report. Do not use for an unconstrained applicant portfolio dump, an applicant-free technology landscape, or downstream technical tagging after retrieval.

Conduct an evidence-backed freedom-to-operate risk screen for monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates across user-selected markets. Use when a user provides antibody sequences or a defined biologic candidate and asks for patent clearance, claim coverage screening, jurisdiction-specific risk triage, or design-around questions.

Perform a preliminary cross-border patent and design-right risk screen for an e-commerce or consumer product using product images, a product page, or a technical description. Use when a seller, importer, manufacturer, product team, or IP analyst asks about patent risk, FTO screening, product-launch risk, market-entry risk, design patents, registered designs, utility models, or possible design-around options in one or more target markets. Analyze technical patents, utility models where available, and jurisdiction-appropriate design rights; provide evidence-backed market-specific risk triage, not legal clearance.

Identify potentially protectable technical contributions in R&D updates, meeting notes, design documents, architecture descriptions, experiment records, and technical-improvement narratives. Use when a user asks what may be innovative, patent-review worthy, suitable for trade-secret review, or in need of invention-disclosure follow-up.

Route a technology-intelligence request to a technology landscape, invention-mining workflow, or current-intelligence briefing, and produce an evidence-backed English HTML report. Use for emerging AI, semiconductor, display, electronics, or other fast-moving technology domains when the user needs route evolution, competitor positioning, invention opportunities, patent mining, or multi-source monitoring.

Execute a user-supplied PatSnap advanced patent query containing field operators such as ANCS:, TAC_ALL:, DESC_B:, MAINF:, ALL_AN:, PN:, APD:, PBD:, APNO:, or PRNO:, then generate an evidence-backed competitor patent report with portfolio counts, company-level technical summaries, hierarchical patent details, optional literature context, Markdown output, and an accessible HTML rendering. Use when the user explicitly asks to run a PatSnap query or create a report from one; require verified PatSnap MCP or documented global API access and never collect credentials in chat.

Review supplied US patent application claims and relevant specification, drawings, Office-action, and prosecution context for claim quality, prosecution readiness, 35 U.S.C. 101/102/103/112 risk, BRI, 112(f), dependency/form, restriction/election, continuation/divisional strategy, infringement observability, and amendment options. Use for US claim review, drafting quality control, amendment strategy, or a structured claim issue list.

Review claims in a Korean patent application or a foreign or PCT application intended for Korea. Use when users need an evidence-backed assessment of Korean claim compliance, claim architecture, scope strategy, drafting and translation quality, examination risk, novelty or inventive-step risk, amendment options, or filing readiness, with a structured English or HTML report.

Review the quality, reproducibility, legal reasoning, and decision usefulness of an existing freedom-to-operate (FTO), patent-infringement-risk, or event IP risk report. Use for three-layer evidence review, four-dimension scoring, independent multi-route search comparison, omission analysis, fatal-defect screening, remediation planning, or HTML assessment generation. The skill audits a supplied report; it does not replace a jurisdiction-specific legal opinion.

Review European patent application claims and supporting application materials for EPO/EPC examination readiness. Use when a user uploads or cites a European patent application, claim set, specification draft, Euro-PCT text, PCT application intended for the European phase, or foreign-language filing intended for Europe, or asks for EPC Articles 84, 83, 123(2), 82, 54 or 56 analysis, Rule 43 practice, unity review, claim interpretation, claim-amendment options, fallback positions, or European patent attorney-style drafting quality control.

Assess underused patents and related intangible assets, cluster them into decision-ready packages, evaluate internal reuse and transaction options, research candidate counterparties, and create evidence-backed portfolio activation deliverables. Use for patent portfolio activation, maintenance review, outbound licensing or assignment screening, transaction-readiness review, internal R&D reuse, candidate buyer/licensee research, management reporting, or a 30/60/90-day activation plan.

Generate and prioritize experimentally testable target hypotheses from one or more small-molecule structures. Use when a user supplies SMILES or a compound library and asks which targets the molecules may modulate, how structural neighbors and SAR support the hypotheses, which biological and competitive evidence should be checked, or which compounds and targets should advance to orthogonal validation.

Monitor patent-litigation exposure for a primary company and up to four named comparison parties. Use when users need target-centric identification of potentially litigated patents, patent-family and claim analysis, verified proceeding timelines, case deep dives, inventor activity, geographic exposure, litigation alerts, technology trends, and an evidence-backed HTML report with structured JSON or CSV attachments.

Monitor public patent records for inventor identity, organizational-association and technical-adjacency signals that merit qualified review. Use when an authorized IP or R&D team asks to screen a company or named inventors over a defined period and produce an evidence-backed HTML briefing; never infer resignation, employment, misconduct or legal risk from patent records alone.

Analyze one competitor’s patent portfolio architecture in a defined technology, including public technical context, entity-resolved patent retrieval, representative-family selection, claim and specification review, core-versus-peripheral protection hypotheses, technical-density mapping, product-feature visualization, geographic filing behavior, and evidence-backed R&D actions. Use for competitor patent monitoring and strategy reports in HTML or PDF; do not use as a substitute for infringement or freedom-to-operate analysis.