/competitive-intelligence
Analyze competitor IP portfolios — comparative patent portfolio reports
$ npx -y skills add yogsoth-ai/de-anthropocentric-research-engine --skill competitive-intelligence --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/competitive-intelligence
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Analyze competitor IP portfolios — comparative patent portfolio reports
SKILL.md
competitive-intelligence.SKILL.mdname: competitive-intelligence
description: 'Analyze competitor IP portfolios — comparative patent portfolio reports
with strategy inference. Budget: 120 patent families, 15 claim parses, 40 web searches.'
execution: strategy
dependencies:
tactics:
- classification-navigation
- knowledge-acquisition-claim-decomposition
- patent-family-tracing
sops:
- assignee-normalization
- citation-network-analysis
- claim-parsing
- knowledge-acquisition-saturation-detection
- legal-status-assessment
- patent-categorization
- patent-query-formulation
- patent-synthesis
- quality-scoring
- trend-analysis
Competitive Intelligence
Analyzes competitor patent portfolios to infer R&D strategy, identify strengths and weaknesses, and produce comparative intelligence reports.
Purpose
Profile competitor IP portfolios to understand their technology focus, filing strategy, geographic coverage, and potential future directions. Enables strategic IP positioning.
Budget
| Metric | Target | |--------|--------| | Patent families analyzed | 120 | | Claim parses | 15 | | Web searches completed | 40 |
State Ledger
| Metric | Target | Current | % | |--------|--------|---------|---| | Patent families analyzed | 120 | 0 | 0% | | Claim parses completed | 15 | 0 | 0% | | Web searches completed | 40 | 0 | 0% | | Competitors profiled | — | 0 | — | | Portfolio comparisons | — | 0 | — |
**HARD-GATE**: Cannot exit iteration loop until 80% of patent families (96), claim parses (12), and web searches (32) budget met.
Available Tactics
| Tactic | When to Use | |--------|-------------| | patent-family-tracing | Build complete portfolio for each competitor | | classification-navigation | Map competitor technology focus areas | | claim-decomposition | Analyze claim scope of competitor key patents |
Available SOPs
| SOP | Role in This Strategy | |-----|----------------------| | patent-query-formulation | Generate assignee-focused search queries | | assignee-normalization | Resolve subsidiary/parent relationships | | patent-categorization | Classify competitor patents by technology area | | citation-network-analysis | Map inter-competitor citation relationships | | trend-analysis | Analyze competitor filing velocity and direction | | claim-parsing | Parse key competitor claims for scope analysis | | quality-scoring | Assess competitor patent quality distribution | | legal-status-assessment | Determine active vs. expired competitor IP | | saturation-detection | Confirm portfolio coverage is complete | | patent-synthesis | Produce competitive intelligence report |
Execution Guidance
1. **Competitor identification** — Identify target competitors from user input or landscape data 2. **Assignee normalization** — Resolve all name variants and subsidiaries with `assignee-normalization` 3. **Portfolio collection** — Search for all patents per competitor using `patent-query-formulation` 4. **Family tracing** — Complete portfolio with `patent-family-tracing` 5. **Categorization** — Classify each competitor's patents by technology with `patent-categorization` 6. **Trend analysis** — Analyze filing patterns per competitor with `trend-analysis` 7. **Citation analysis** — Map cross-citation between competitors with `citation-network-analysis` 8. **Key claim analysis** — Parse top patents per competitor with `claim-parsing` 9. **Quality assessment** — Score portfolios with `quality-scoring` 10. **Synthesis** — Produce comparative report with `patent-synthesis`
Output Format
# Competitive Patent Intelligence: [Technology Domain]
## Competitor Profiles
### [Competitor A]
- Portfolio size: [N] families
- Technology focus: [top IPC classes]
- Filing trend: [increasing/stable/declining]
- Geographic coverage: [jurisdictions]
- Key patents: [top 3 by quality score]
## Comparative Analysis
| Metric | Comp A | Comp B | Comp C |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|
| Total families | | | |
| Filing velocity (last 3yr) | | | |
| Avg quality score | | | |
| Geographic breadth | | | |
## Citation Network
[Inter-competitor citation patterns and influence]
## Strategic Inferences
[R&D direction, potential acquisitions, licensing opportunities]
## Recommendations
[Positioning strategy relative to competitors]
<!-- BEGIN available-tables (generated) -->
Available Tactics
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use | | --- | --- | | classification-navigation | IPC/CPC hierarchy drill-down and lateral expansion for patent discovery | | knowledge-acquisition-claim-decomposition | Independent/dependent claim parsing, element extraction, and feature mapping to technical domains | | patent-family-tracing | Forward/backward patent citation and priority tracing until saturation |
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use | | --- | --- | | assignee-normalization | Standardize assignee names and identify corporate group affiliations across patent offices | | citation-network-analysis | Build and analyze patent citation networks — main path analysis, PageRank, cluster detection | | claim-parsing | Patent claim syntax parsing — independent/dependent relationships and element extraction | | knowledge-acquisition-saturation-detection | Determine when additional searching yields diminishing returns. Analyzes the latest expansion batch against existing corpus to judge continue/near-saturation/saturated. Used by snowball and systematic-survey. | | legal-status-assessment | Determine patent legal status — active, expired, pending, lapsed, or revoked | | patent-categorization | Classify patents by tech subdomain, application scenario, and value chain position | | patent-query-formulation | Construct keyword + IPC/CPC + assignee combination search strategies for patent databases | | patent-synthesis | Produce final structured patent intelligence report from all analysis results | | quality-s
Read more
name: competitive-intelligence description: 'Analyze competitor IP portfolios — comparative patent portfolio reports with strategy inference. Budget: 120 patent families, 15 claim parses, 40 web searches.' execution: strategy dependencies: tactics: - classification-navigation - knowledge-acquisition-claim-decomposition - patent-family-tracing sops: - assignee-normalization - citation-network-analysis - claim-parsing - knowledge-acquisition-saturation-detection - legal-status-assessment - patent-categorization - patent-query-formulation - patent-synthesis - quality-scoring - trend-analysis
Competitive Intelligence
Analyzes competitor patent portfolios to infer R&D strategy, identify strengths and weaknesses, and produce comparative intelligence reports.
Purpose
Profile competitor IP portfolios to understand their technology focus, filing strategy, geographic coverage, and potential future directions. Enables strategic IP positioning.
Budget
| Metric | Target | |--------|--------| | Patent families analyzed | 120 | | Claim parses | 15 | | Web searches completed | 40 |
State Ledger
| Metric | Target | Current | % | |--------|--------|---------|---| | Patent families analyzed | 120 | 0 | 0% | | Claim parses completed | 15 | 0 | 0% | | Web searches completed | 40 | 0 | 0% | | Competitors profiled | — | 0 | — | | Portfolio comparisons | — | 0 | — |
**HARD-GATE**: Cannot exit iteration loop until 80% of patent families (96), claim parses (12), and web searches (32) budget met.
Available Tactics
| Tactic | When to Use | |--------|-------------| | patent-family-tracing | Build complete portfolio for each competitor | | classification-navigation | Map competitor technology focus areas | | claim-decomposition | Analyze claim scope of competitor key patents |
Available SOPs
| SOP | Role in This Strategy | |-----|----------------------| | patent-query-formulation | Generate assignee-focused search queries | | assignee-normalization | Resolve subsidiary/parent relationships | | patent-categorization | Classify competitor patents by technology area | | citation-network-analysis | Map inter-competitor citation relationships | | trend-analysis | Analyze competitor filing velocity and direction | | claim-parsing | Parse key competitor claims for scope analysis | | quality-scoring | Assess competitor patent quality distribution | | legal-status-assessment | Determine active vs. expired competitor IP | | saturation-detection | Confirm portfolio coverage is complete | | patent-synthesis | Produce competitive intelligence report |
Execution Guidance
1. **Competitor identification** — Identify target competitors from user input or landscape data 2. **Assignee normalization** — Resolve all name variants and subsidiaries with `assignee-normalization` 3. **Portfolio collection** — Search for all patents per competitor using `patent-query-formulation` 4. **Family tracing** — Complete portfolio with `patent-family-tracing` 5. **Categorization** — Classify each competitor's patents by technology with `patent-categorization` 6. **Trend analysis** — Analyze filing patterns per competitor with `trend-analysis` 7. **Citation analysis** — Map cross-citation between competitors with `citation-network-analysis` 8. **Key claim analysis** — Parse top patents per competitor with `claim-parsing` 9. **Quality assessment** — Score portfolios with `quality-scoring` 10. **Synthesis** — Produce comparative report with `patent-synthesis`
Output Format
# Competitive Patent Intelligence: [Technology Domain] ## Competitor Profiles ### [Competitor A] - Portfolio size: [N] families - Technology focus: [top IPC classes] - Filing trend: [increasing/stable/declining] - Geographic coverage: [jurisdictions] - Key patents: [top 3 by quality score] ## Comparative Analysis | Metric | Comp A | Comp B | Comp C | |--------|--------|--------|--------| | Total families | | | | | Filing velocity (last 3yr) | | | | | Avg quality score | | | | | Geographic breadth | | | | ## Citation Network [Inter-competitor citation patterns and influence] ## Strategic Inferences [R&D direction, potential acquisitions, licensing opportunities] ## Recommendations [Positioning strategy relative to competitors]
<!-- BEGIN available-tables (generated) -->
Available Tactics
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use | | --- | --- | | classification-navigation | IPC/CPC hierarchy drill-down and lateral expansion for patent discovery | | knowledge-acquisition-claim-decomposition | Independent/dependent claim parsing, element extraction, and feature mapping to technical domains | | patent-family-tracing | Forward/backward patent citation and priority tracing until saturation |
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use | | --- | --- | | assignee-normalization | Standardize assignee names and identify corporate group affiliations across patent offices | | citation-network-analysis | Build and analyze patent citation networks — main path analysis, PageRank, cluster detection | | claim-parsing | Patent claim syntax parsing — independent/dependent relationships and element extraction | | knowledge-acquisition-saturation-detection | Determine when additional searching yields diminishing returns. Analyzes the latest expansion batch against existing corpus to judge continue/near-saturation/saturated. Used by snowball and systematic-survey. | | legal-status-assessment | Determine patent legal status — active, expired, pending, lapsed, or revoked | | patent-categorization | Classify patents by tech subdomain, application scenario, and value chain position | | patent-query-formulation | Construct keyword + IPC/CPC + assignee combination search strategies for patent databases | | patent-synthesis | Produce final structured patent intelligence report from all analysis results | | quality-s
The complete research orchestration system for AI-native science. What It Does Design Philosophy Architecture (v3.2.2) Quick Start Configuration Roadmap License DARE is not a tool that helps you do research. It is the researcher.
Repo: yogsoth-ai/de-anthropocentric-research-engine
Other skills on de-anthropocentric-research-engine.
- /formated-results
Closing skill for the research-executor, loaded as the last step of formated-specs. Summarize the design just produced into one research-result JSON fenced block in your reply. Do not execute the research.
Open skill - /formated-specs
Spec-slot skill for the research-executor. Emit the 4-layer DARE orchestration of the assigned topic as one research-graph JSON fenced block in your reply. Replaces the generic spec-writing step.
Open skill - /injection-fidelity
Loss-1 judge (codex role). Given one sample's de-identified dialogue and its PolicyCard, decide axis-by-axis whether the user-simulator enacted the card's per-axis pressure. Judge enactment of the card, never whether the research is good.
Open skill - /ladder-quality-order
Loss-2 judge (codex role). Over one topic's 6 shuffled research-design samples, pairwise-rank by quality using the D1–D5 standard. Emit the pairwise log; the harness computes the order and the ladder verdicts. Judge quality difference, never against academic standards.
Open skill - /optimization-loop
The optimizer brain for the ladder-foundry pretraining loop. Runs the two-level nested batch loop, delegates gating to gate_eval, attributes a failing batch to one weight (attribute-first), and recovers from disk after compaction. Control flow is fully scripted; only the
Open skill - /acu-nugget-recall
Tactic: Extract atomic units from one paper and score how much of a caller-supplied summary covers. Use for ACU-style binary or Nugget-style ternary recall checks; cannot run without a target summary.
Open skill

