Specification Writing: Section-by-Section Patent Description
Write the patent specification based on: $ARGUMENTS
Adapted from
for patent specifications. The specification supports the claims -- it is not a paper.
Constants
- — External reviewer for specification quality
- — Inherit from pipeline or detect from args; , , ,
OUTPUT_FORMAT = "markdown"
— Markdown drafts; converted to filing format by
- — Base output directory
- — Auto from jurisdiction: CN->Chinese, US/EP->English
Inputs
- — the drafted claims (primary source)
patent/INVENTION_DISCLOSURE.md
— invention decomposition
patent/PRIOR_ART_REPORT.md
— for background section
- User-provided figures (if any)
Shared References
Load
../shared-references/patent-writing-principles.md
for specification writing rules, language guidelines, and reference numeral conventions.
Load
../shared-references/patent-format-cn.md
or
or
based on jurisdiction.
Workflow
Step 1: Initialize Specification Structure
Create the output directory and section files:
patent/specification/
├── title.md
├── technical_field.md
├── background.md
├── summary.md
├── drawings_description.md
├── detailed_description.md
└── abstract.md
Step 2: Write Title (发明名称)
- Must match the broadest claim scope
- No trademarks, no "improved" or "new" or "novel"
- CN format: "一种[领域]的[技术主题]" or "[领域]的[技术主题]装置"
- US/EP format: "[Technical topic] for [purpose]" or "[Technical topic] and method thereof"
- Keep concise (CN: typically under 25 characters; US: under 500 characters)
Step 3: Write Technical Field (技术领域)
1-2 paragraphs identifying the technical domain:
- "The present invention relates to [broad field], and more particularly to [specific area]."
- CN: "本发明涉及[技术领域],具体涉及[具体领域]。"
Step 4: Write Background (背景技术)
This is NOT a literature review. It directly sets up the problem.
Structure:
- Describe the closest prior art approaches (2-3 paragraphs)
- Identify specific technical deficiencies of each approach
- The deficiencies must be technical, not commercial or social
- DO NOT admit the prior art is "superior" or "better"
- DO NOT cite specific patent numbers unless they are known prior art (citations go in IDS for US, or Background section for CN)
CN format: "背景技术" section describing existing technology and its shortcomings.
Step 5: Write Summary (发明内容)
Three parts, directly mirroring INVENTION_DISCLOSURE.md:
Technical Problem (要解决的技术问题):
- State the problem derived from background deficiencies
- CN: "本发明要解决的技术问题是..."
Technical Solution (技术方案):
- Describe how the invention solves the problem
- Must provide support for ALL claim elements
- Start from the broadest claim and describe the core inventive concept
- CN: "为解决上述技术问题,本发明采用的技术方案是:..."
- NO formulas, NO mathematical derivations, NO circuit models — these belong in 具体实施方式, not 发明内容
Advantages (有益效果):
- Benefits derived from the structural/technical features (qualitative reasoning)
- CN: "本发明的有益效果是:..."
- NO specific numerical results (e.g., "detection limit 70μm", "response time 105ms") — these are experimental findings, not invention properties
- Frame advantages structurally: "由于采用了...结构,因此具有...效果"
Step 6: Write Brief Description of Drawings (附图说明)
Invoke
as a sub-skill if user has provided figures:
/figure-description "patent/figures/"
If no user figures, describe what figures should exist based on the claims.
Format:
- CN: "图1是...的示意图;图2是...的流程图;"
- US: "FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing...; FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating..."
Step 7: Write Detailed Description (具体实施方式)
/embodiment-description "patent/CLAIMS.md"
This section must:
- Describe at least one complete embodiment with reference numerals
- Enable a POSITA to make and use the invention
- Support every claim element with explicit description
- Include variations and alternatives for broader claim interpretation
Step 8: Write Abstract (摘要)
Jurisdiction-specific word limits:
| Jurisdiction | Word Limit | Notes |
|---|
| CN | 300 words (Chinese characters) | Include most representative claim reference |
| US | 150 words (2500 characters) | Enable efficient searching, no legal phrases |
| EP | ~150 words | No statements on merits or value |
The abstract summarizes:
- The technical field
- The problem being solved
- The technical solution (core features)
- Key advantages
Step 9: Claim Support Verification
Verify every claim element finds support in the specification:
| Claim | Element | Specification Section | Paragraph(s) | Reference Numeral |
|---|
| 1 | step a | detailed_description | ¶3 | 202 |
| 1 | step b | detailed_description | ¶4 | 204 |
| X | component A | detailed_description | ¶2 | 102 |
If any element lacks support, add the necessary description before proceeding.
Step 10: Cross-Model Review
Call
via
with xhigh reasoning:
mcp__codex__codex:
config: {"model_reasoning_effort": "xhigh"}
prompt: |
You are a patent examiner reviewing a specification for completeness.
CLAIMS: [all claims]
SPECIFICATION: [all specification sections]
Check for:
1. Written description support: Does every claim element have explicit or inherent support?
2. Enablement: Can a POSITA practice the invention from this specification?
3. Consistency: Do reference numerals match across figures and specification?
4. Language quality: Any subjective terms, relative terms without definition, or result-to-be-achieved language?
5. Missing embodiments: Are there claim features that need additional embodiments?
6. Background deficiencies: Are they technical and specific enough?
Step 11: Output
All specification sections are in
.
Summary file:
patent/specification/SPECIFICATION_INDEX.md
with:
markdown
## Patent Specification
### Sections
|---------|------|-----------|--------|
| Title | title.md | | Complete |
| Technical Field | technical_field.md | | Complete |
| Background | background.md | | Complete |
| Summary | summary.md | | Complete |
| Drawings Description | drawings_description.md | | Complete |
| Detailed Description | detailed_description.md | | Complete |
| Abstract | abstract.md | | Complete |
### Claim Support Status
|-------|-------------------|-----------------|
| 1 | All | None |
| X | All | None |
Key Rules
- The specification supports the claims, not the other way around. Every claim element must have support.
- Use consistent terminology -- same word for the same concept throughout.
- DO NOT include experimental results, accuracy metrics, or empirical evaluations.
- DO NOT use subjective language ("excellent", "surprising", "superior").
- Reference numerals must be consistent: same component, same numeral, everywhere.
- Background section describes specific deficiencies, not general "need for improvement."
- Multiple embodiments strengthen the specification but are not always required.
- Large file handling: if a Write operation fails, retry with Bash heredoc.
- If is not available, skip cross-model review and note it in the output.