Recipe Invention Disclosure

Recipe: Invention Disclosure (IDF)

Capture an invention completely enough that an attorney can draft from it.

Step 1: Structured Capture

Interview for these sections (push past marketing language to mechanisms):

1. Problem — what fails today, and why existing approaches fall short
2. Prior approaches — what the inventors know exists, including their own earlier work
3. The inventive concept — the mechanism of the solution, not the benefit
4. Key elements — minimum set needed for the invention to work
5. Variations — alternative embodiments, ranges, materials, algorithms
6. Evidence — prototypes, test data, figures
7. People and dates — inventors and contribution; conception date; any public disclosure, sale, offer, or publication with dates (bar dates differ by jurisdiction — flag anything older than 12 months)

Step 2: Novelty Pre-Check

Write the queries yourself from the Step 1 capture — the "key elements" list is your term extraction. Keep the phrases that discriminate (the mechanism, not the benefit), probe the count, then search both offices (method in flowleap-patent; the disclosure never has to leave the machine to become a query):

flowleap --json tools run search_patents query='<self-written CQL>' range=1-1 details=false
flowleap --json patent search --query "<self-written CQL>" --limit 20
flowleap --json uspto search --query "<self-written ODP Lucene>" --limit 20   # title + metadata only

# Literature — inventors' own field publishes here first
flowleap --json academic search "<concept keywords>" --limit 15
flowleap --json npl "<concept keywords>" --limit 10

For anything close, pull claims and record how the invention differs:

flowleap --json ops claims <close-patent>

This is a sanity check, not a legal search — say so in the IDF.

Step 3: Landscape Context

flowleap --json analytics --keyword "<technology>" --date-from 2018-01-01

Filing trends and top assignees tell the reviewer whether this space is crowded, growing, or abandoned — context for the filing decision.

Step 4: Assemble the IDF

Sections: title; inventors + contributions; problem; prior approaches (including Step 2 findings with the differences recorded); detailed description of the inventive concept; key elements; variations; evidence; disclosure/bar-date audit; landscape summary.

Step 5: Recommendation

Close with one of: file now (novelty check clean, bar clock running), develop further (concept not yet enabled), or defensive publication (crowded space, low claim scope) — with the reasoning.

Output

A complete IDF document plus the raw novelty pre-check data (queries used, hits reviewed, differences noted) as an appendix.