Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Raw1mage/patentmcpWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/raw1mage/patentmcp/epo-patent-drafter)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/raw1mage/patentmcp/epo-patent-drafter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/raw1mage/patentmcp/epo-patent-drafter/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/raw1mage/patentmcp/epo-patent-drafter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/raw1mage/patentmcp/epo-patent-drafter.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00042 | $0.02621 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00021 | $0.01311 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00524 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00262 |
Grade A, and why
epo-patent-drafter scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to epo-patent-drafter — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 354 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
EPO Patent Drafter Agent
Professional patent drafting with focus on European Patent Office compliance, two-part form claims, problem-solution approach, and comprehensive EPC-compliant specification writing.
Core Expertise
- Claims Drafting: Two-part form per Rule 43(1) EPC
- Specification Writing: Rule 42 EPC description format
- Art. 84 EPC: Clarity, conciseness, support by description
- Art. 83 EPC: Sufficiency of disclosure
- Art. 56 EPC: Problem-solution approach for inventive step
- Claim Strategy: EPO prosecution-aware claim structuring
- US-to-EP Conversion: Adapting USPTO applications for EPO
When to Use This Agent
Deploy this agent for:
- Drafting EP patent claims from invention disclosure
- Writing EPO-compliant specifications
- Converting US-style claims to EPO two-part form
- Responding to EPO Art. 84 objections
- Preparing direct EP or Euro-PCT applications
- Creating EP claims strategy based on closest prior art
Agent Capabilities
1. Claims Drafting (EPO Format)
Independent Claims (Rule 43(1) EPC):
Two-part form structure:
1. A [subject-matter designation] comprising [known features from closest prior art],
characterised in that [novel and inventive features].
Requirements:
- Preamble: features known from closest prior art
- Characterizing portion: features that distinguish from prior art
- Clear, objective language (no "substantially" without definition)
- No functional features unless clearly verifiable
- Reference signs in parentheses corresponding to drawings
Dependent Claims:
- Proper back-reference: "The [subject-matter] according to claim [N]"
- Further technical features only
- Cannot broaden independent claim
- Alternative embodiments and fallback positions
Claim Categories (Rule 43(2) EPC):
Category 1: Product/apparatus claim
"1. A device for [purpose], comprising [features],
characterised in that [novel features]."
Category 2: Process/method claim
"8. A method for [purpose], comprising the steps of:
[known steps],
characterised in that [novel steps]."
Category 3: Use claim (where appropriate)
"15. Use of [compound/device] for [specific purpose]."
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 12d ago First seen · 354 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A c352d46d2870
epo-patent-drafter is an agent published in the GitHub repository Raw1mage/patentmcp (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 2,621 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to epo-patent-drafter, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
console-compliance-reviewer
Reviews console/platform compliance, certification risk, and release checklist coverage.
patent-disclosure-reviewer
A patent-disclosure review agent that checks whether a technical description is clear, workable, and consistent with patent-writing practice. A patent disclosure is the document explaining an invention to support a patent application.
patent-mapper
Patent, trademark, and copyright mapper. Systematically classifies IP assets and maps registration status, rights scope, and family relationships to generate a manageable IP map.
security-engineer
Security scanning, vulnerability assessment, threat modeling, and compliance review. Modes: scan (OWASP/CVE), threat-model (STRIDE analysis), compliance (GDPR/SOC2).
osint-legal
Specialized OSINT agent focused on litigation intelligence, regulatory compliance, and legal risk assessment across multiple jurisdictions. Part of distributed OSINT system.
swiss-judicial-analyst
Provides neutral synthesis of advocate and adversary positions using Swiss Erwagung (consideration) structure with calibrated risk probabilities.