{"passport":{"unfragile":{"@version":"1.0","version":"2026-05","artifact":{"id":"tool_ip-author","slug":"ip-author","name":"IP Author","type":"product","url":"https://ipauthor.com","page_url":"https://unfragile.ai/ip-author","categories":["text-writing"],"tags":[],"pricing":{"model":"paid","free":false,"starting_price":null},"status":"active","verified":false},"capabilities":[{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_0","uri":"capability://legal.real.time.prior.art.search.during.drafting","name":"real-time prior art search during drafting","description":"Searches patent databases and prior art references in real-time as the user drafts patent claims, surfacing relevant existing patents and publications that may impact novelty. Integrates search results directly into the writing workflow without requiring context switching.","intents":["I want to know if my claim language overlaps with existing patents while I'm writing","I need to avoid drafting claims that will be rejected for lack of novelty","I want to eliminate the separate prior art research phase from my workflow"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","in-house counsel at tech companies","IP boutique firms","solo patent practitioners"],"limitations":["Accuracy depends on completeness of underlying prior art database","May miss obscure or non-patent references","Real-time results may have latency depending on database size","Cannot assess non-obviousness—only flags existing references"],"requires":["Access to patent databases and prior art sources","Internet connectivity for real-time queries","User expertise to interpret relevance of flagged references"],"input_types":["patent claim text","technical specification excerpts"],"output_types":["ranked list of prior art references","relevance assessments","claim-to-reference comparison highlights"],"categories":["legal","research","productivity"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_1","uri":"capability://legal.ai.assisted.patent.claim.generation","name":"ai-assisted patent claim generation","description":"Generates multiple structural variations of patent claims based on technical specifications and invention descriptions. Produces alternative claim phrasings and scope options to explore different protection strategies without manual rewriting.","intents":["I want to quickly explore different ways to claim my invention","I need multiple claim variations to compare scope and strength","I want to reduce the time spent on initial claim drafting"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent agents","technical inventors drafting their own applications"],"limitations":["Generated claims often require significant attorney refinement","May inadvertently narrow scope or create unintended limitations","Cannot validate technical accuracy against actual embodiments","Requires domain expertise to assess claim quality"],"requires":["Technical specification or invention description","Understanding of claim drafting principles","Attorney review and validation before use"],"input_types":["technical specification text","invention summary","prior claim examples","claim scope parameters"],"output_types":["multiple claim variations","independent and dependent claim structures","alternative claim phrasings"],"categories":["legal","content-generation","productivity"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_10","uri":"capability://legal.technical.field.classification.and.prior.art.filtering","name":"technical field classification and prior art filtering","description":"Automatically classifies inventions into technical fields and filters prior art results by relevant classifications. Reduces noise in prior art searches by focusing on relevant technical domains.","intents":["I want to find prior art only in my technical field","I need to filter out irrelevant patents from my search results","I want to understand what technical classification my invention falls into"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent researchers","patent examiners","inventors"],"limitations":["Classification accuracy depends on invention description clarity","May misclassify interdisciplinary inventions","Filtering may exclude relevant cross-field prior art","Requires understanding of patent classification systems"],"requires":["Technical specification or invention description","Access to patent classification databases","Understanding of technical field boundaries"],"input_types":["invention descriptions","technical specifications","claim language"],"output_types":["technical field classifications","filtered prior art results","classification codes","relevance rankings"],"categories":["legal","research","classification"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_11","uri":"capability://legal.claim.to.prior.art.comparison.and.mapping","name":"claim-to-prior-art comparison and mapping","description":"Performs detailed comparison between claim language and prior art references, identifying specific overlaps and differences. Maps claim elements to prior art disclosures to assess novelty and non-obviousness.","intents":["I want to understand exactly how my claims differ from prior art","I need to identify which claim elements are novel","I want to assess the strength of my claims against specific references"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent prosecutors","patent agents","patent examiners"],"limitations":["Comparison requires accurate claim interpretation","Cannot assess non-obviousness—only identifies literal overlaps","Requires attorney expertise to evaluate significance of differences","May miss subtle technical distinctions"],"requires":["Claim language","Prior art references","Technical understanding of invention","Patent law expertise"],"input_types":["patent claims","prior art documents","technical specifications"],"output_types":["claim-to-reference mappings","overlap analysis","novelty assessments","difference highlights"],"categories":["legal","analysis","research"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_12","uri":"capability://productivity.attorney.time.tracking.and.workflow.optimization","name":"attorney time tracking and workflow optimization","description":"Tracks time spent on patent drafting tasks and identifies workflow bottlenecks. Provides insights into which tasks consume the most attorney time and where AI assistance provides the greatest time savings.","intents":["I want to understand where I'm spending the most time on patent work","I need to measure the time savings from using AI-assisted drafting","I want to optimize my patent prosecution workflow"],"best_for":["IP boutiques","in-house legal teams","solo practitioners","law firm management"],"limitations":["Tracking accuracy depends on user input","May not capture all indirect time costs","Requires consistent use to generate meaningful data","Insights are firm-specific and may not generalize"],"requires":["User engagement with tracking features","Consistent workflow usage","Data collection over time"],"input_types":["task completion events","time entries","workflow actions"],"output_types":["time tracking reports","workflow analytics","bottleneck identification","time savings metrics"],"categories":["productivity","analytics","business-intelligence"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_2","uri":"capability://legal.novelty.issue.flagging.during.drafting","name":"novelty issue flagging during drafting","description":"Identifies and alerts the user to potential patentability issues and novelty conflicts as claims are being written, rather than waiting for post-submission review. Provides early warnings about claim language that may conflict with prior art.","intents":["I want to catch patentability problems before submitting to the USPTO","I need to know immediately if my claim language creates novelty issues","I want to avoid the costly cycle of rejections and amendments"],"best_for":["patent prosecutors","patent attorneys","in-house IP counsel"],"limitations":["Flags are based on automated analysis—may produce false positives","Cannot assess non-obviousness or inventive step","Requires attorney judgment to determine if flagged issues are material","Database gaps may result in false negatives"],"requires":["Real-time prior art database access","User expertise to evaluate flagged issues","Understanding of patent law and claim interpretation"],"input_types":["patent claim text","claim amendments"],"output_types":["novelty conflict alerts","prior art reference citations","severity indicators","suggested claim modifications"],"categories":["legal","quality-assurance","productivity"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_3","uri":"capability://legal.prior.art.database.integration.and.search","name":"prior art database integration and search","description":"Maintains and queries a comprehensive database of patents, publications, and prior art references. Provides structured search and retrieval of relevant prior art documents indexed by technical classification, keywords, and claim language.","intents":["I need to find all patents related to a specific technical field","I want to search prior art by claim language or technical features","I need to access a curated, up-to-date patent database"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent examiners","patent researchers","technical inventors"],"limitations":["Database coverage may have gaps in certain technical fields","Currency of database depends on update frequency","Search results require expert interpretation","May not include all non-patent literature"],"requires":["Access to IP Author platform","Search query formulation skills","Understanding of patent classification systems"],"input_types":["keyword queries","patent classification codes","claim language","technical specifications"],"output_types":["ranked prior art documents","patent citations","publication metadata","relevance scores"],"categories":["legal","research","database"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_4","uri":"capability://legal.claim.scope.optimization","name":"claim scope optimization","description":"Analyzes claim language to suggest modifications that broaden or narrow scope based on prior art constraints and prosecution strategy. Helps balance protection breadth against patentability risk.","intents":["I want to maximize claim scope while staying patentable","I need to understand the scope implications of my claim language","I want to strategically narrow claims to overcome prior art rejections"],"best_for":["experienced patent attorneys","patent prosecutors","patent agents"],"limitations":["Scope optimization is context-dependent and requires domain expertise","AI suggestions may not align with prosecution strategy","Cannot predict examiner interpretation or enforcement scenarios","Requires validation against actual technical embodiments"],"requires":["Understanding of claim scope and prosecution strategy","Technical knowledge of the invention","Prior art analysis results"],"input_types":["patent claims","prior art references","technical specifications","prosecution history"],"output_types":["scope modification suggestions","claim narrowing recommendations","scope breadth assessments","risk-benefit analysis"],"categories":["legal","optimization","strategy"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_5","uri":"capability://legal.patent.application.document.generation","name":"patent application document generation","description":"Generates structured patent application documents including specification sections, abstract, and claims based on technical input and AI-assisted drafting. Produces USPTO-compliant formatting and document structure.","intents":["I want to quickly generate a complete patent application draft","I need properly formatted patent documents ready for filing","I want to reduce the time spent on document assembly and formatting"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent agents","in-house counsel","inventors filing pro se"],"limitations":["Generated documents require attorney review and refinement","May not capture all technical nuances of the invention","Formatting compliance depends on USPTO rule updates","Requires customization for specific technical fields"],"requires":["Technical specification or invention description","Drawings or diagrams (optional)","Attorney review before filing","Understanding of patent application requirements"],"input_types":["technical specifications","invention summaries","drawings","claim language","background information"],"output_types":["complete patent application documents","specification sections","abstract text","claim sets","formatted documents"],"categories":["legal","document-generation","productivity"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_6","uri":"capability://legal.technical.specification.to.claim.translation","name":"technical specification to claim translation","description":"Converts technical specifications, drawings, and invention descriptions into properly structured patent claim language. Maps technical features to claim elements and generates claim hierarchies.","intents":["I want to translate my technical description into proper claim language","I need to ensure my claims accurately reflect my technical embodiments","I want to avoid claim language that doesn't match my actual invention"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","technical inventors","patent agents","in-house counsel"],"limitations":["Translation accuracy depends on clarity of technical input","May miss subtle technical distinctions","Requires attorney validation against actual embodiments","Cannot assess whether translated claims are patentable"],"requires":["Clear technical specification or description","Understanding of the invention's technical aspects","Attorney expertise to validate claim language","Knowledge of claim drafting conventions"],"input_types":["technical specifications","engineering drawings","invention descriptions","feature lists"],"output_types":["claim language","claim elements","claim hierarchies","feature-to-claim mappings"],"categories":["legal","translation","technical-writing"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_7","uri":"capability://legal.prosecution.history.analysis.and.amendment.suggestions","name":"prosecution history analysis and amendment suggestions","description":"Analyzes patent office rejections and prosecution history to suggest claim amendments that address examiner rejections while maintaining claim scope. Provides targeted amendment language based on rejection analysis.","intents":["I need to respond to an office action with effective claim amendments","I want to understand why my claims were rejected","I need to find the right balance between overcoming rejections and preserving scope"],"best_for":["patent prosecutors","patent attorneys","in-house counsel","patent agents"],"limitations":["Amendment suggestions are based on automated analysis","May not account for examiner-specific preferences or patterns","Requires attorney judgment to finalize amendments","Cannot predict examiner acceptance of proposed amendments"],"requires":["Office action documents","Current claim language","Prior art references cited in rejection","Prosecution history context"],"input_types":["office action documents","rejection reasons","current claims","prior art references","prosecution history"],"output_types":["amendment suggestions","claim modification language","response arguments","rejection analysis"],"categories":["legal","prosecution","strategy"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_8","uri":"capability://legal.dependent.and.independent.claim.structure.generation","name":"dependent and independent claim structure generation","description":"Generates hierarchical claim structures with independent and dependent claims that provide multiple layers of protection. Optimizes claim dependencies to maximize coverage while maintaining patentability.","intents":["I want to create a claim set with good fallback positions","I need to structure claims to provide broad and narrow protection options","I want to optimize my claim dependencies for prosecution strategy"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent prosecutors","patent agents"],"limitations":["Optimal structure depends on prosecution strategy and prior art","Generated structures require attorney review","May not account for examiner preferences or office action patterns","Requires understanding of claim dependency rules"],"requires":["Independent claim language","Technical understanding of invention","Knowledge of claim drafting best practices","Prior art analysis results"],"input_types":["independent claims","technical specifications","prior art references"],"output_types":["dependent claim structures","claim hierarchies","claim sets","dependency recommendations"],"categories":["legal","claim-drafting","strategy"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"tool_ip-author__cap_9","uri":"capability://legal.claim.language.standardization.and.formatting","name":"claim language standardization and formatting","description":"Standardizes claim language to follow USPTO conventions and best practices. Ensures consistent terminology, proper claim formatting, and compliance with patent drafting rules.","intents":["I want my claims to follow proper USPTO formatting conventions","I need to ensure consistent terminology across my claim set","I want to avoid claim language that violates drafting rules"],"best_for":["patent attorneys","patent agents","in-house counsel","inventors filing pro se"],"limitations":["Standardization may not account for technical field-specific conventions","Requires attorney review to ensure meaning is preserved","May flag false positives for legitimate technical terminology"],"requires":["Claim language input","Understanding of USPTO rules","Knowledge of claim drafting conventions"],"input_types":["claim text","claim language"],"output_types":["standardized claims","formatting corrections","terminology suggestions","compliance flags"],"categories":["legal","formatting","quality-assurance"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0}],"trust":{"score":44,"verified":false,"data_access_risk":"high","permissions":["Access to patent databases and prior art sources","Internet connectivity for real-time queries","User expertise to interpret relevance of flagged references","Technical specification or invention description","Understanding of claim drafting principles","Attorney review and validation before use","Access to patent classification databases","Understanding of technical field boundaries","Claim language","Prior art references"],"failure_modes":["Accuracy depends on completeness of underlying prior art database","May miss obscure or non-patent references","Real-time results may have latency depending on database size","Cannot assess non-obviousness—only flags existing references","Generated claims often require significant attorney refinement","May inadvertently narrow scope or create unintended limitations","Cannot validate technical accuracy against actual embodiments","Requires domain expertise to assess claim quality","Classification accuracy depends on invention description clarity","May misclassify interdisciplinary inventions","builder identity is not verified yet","no observed match outcomes yet"],"rank_breakdown":{"adoption":0.39999999999999997,"quality":0.82,"ecosystem":0.15000000000000002,"match_graph":0.25,"freshness":0.75,"weights":{"adoption":0.25,"quality":0.25,"ecosystem":0.1,"match_graph":0.35,"freshness":0.05}},"observed_outcomes":{"matches":0,"success_rate":0,"avg_confidence":0,"top_intents":[],"last_matched_at":null},"maintenance":{"status":"active","updated_at":"2026-05-24T12:16:31.445Z","last_scraped_at":"2026-04-05T13:23:42.547Z","last_commit":null},"community":{"stars":null,"forks":null,"weekly_downloads":null,"model_downloads":null,"model_likes":null}},"distribution":{"claim_url":"https://unfragile.ai/submit?claim=ip-author","compare_url":"https://unfragile.ai/compare?artifact=ip-author"}},"signature":"gbQTRDstqtP3Ru4keYZhuNUJQ8yK9eoaUDTLCkS3WkVQU+6xQyFuGIhE9uU5uzQXsyx8fWJyQ/fevfxq3lOnCA==","signedAt":"2026-06-19T12:58:38.840Z","signedBy":"unfragile.ai","version":1},"_links":{"self":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/passport/ip-author","artifact":"https://unfragile.ai/ip-author","verify":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/verify?slug=ip-author","publicKey":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/trust-passport-public-key","spec":"https://unfragile.ai/trust","schema":"https://unfragile.ai/schema.json","docs":"https://unfragile.ai/docs"}}