AA review-ep-patent-claims-ip
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.
Review European patent application claims and supporting application materials for EPO/EPC examination readiness.
As a process A 84/100 · Runs to the end — weak spots: progress reporting
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 4. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "copyright"
Process rating: all ten parameters 84/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 85Steps. 173 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3259 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 544: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 35 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 173 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.