← ClaudeAtlas

legal-compliance-contract-reviewlisted

Produces a structured first-pass contract review: a clause inventory against the expected set for the contract type, non-standard terms flagged against the supplied playbook, missing provisions listed as absences, and every issue risk-graded with a proposed position — while never asserting a legal conclusion the supplied text does not support. Use when reviewing an inbound contract, comparing a counterparty's redlines to a fallback position, checking what is missing from a draft, triaging a queue of agreements, or preparing a summary for a qualified reviewer. Trigger on 'review this contract', 'check this MSA', 'what's missing from this agreement', 'redline', 'non-standard clause', 'NDA review', 'supplier agreement', 'terms and conditions review'. Not for drafting an internal policy or standard (use legal-compliance-policy-drafting) or for assessing a new rule's effect across the business (use legal-compliance-regulatory-change-impact).
alihusains/enterprise-skills · ★ 0 · AI & Automation · score 73
Install: claude install-skill alihusains/enterprise-skills
## Purpose A first-pass review fails in one specific way: it comments on the clauses that are present and never notices the clause that is absent. Absence is invisible to reading. This skill runs the inventory before the critique, grades every finding, and hands a qualified reviewer a list of decisions rather than a list of observations. ## Data classification **Confidential, and frequently privileged.** Contracts under negotiation, and any material touching a dispute, are among the most sensitive documents in a business. **STOP CONDITIONS:** | Trigger | Action | | --- | --- | | The material is or may be legally privileged — counsel's advice, litigation strategy, an investigation file, a without-prejudice communication | Stop. State that privileged material should not be processed here and that onward handling can waive privilege. Do not summarise, quote, or excerpt it. | | The contract relates to live or threatened litigation, a regulatory investigation, or a settlement | Stop. Route to counsel. | | Personal data of named individuals appears beyond signature blocks — employee records, customer lists, special-category data | Stop. Ask for it to be removed; the clause language is what is under review, not the schedules of data. | | The user asks for a conclusion on enforceability, validity, or the law of a jurisdiction | Stop short of the conclusion. Frame it as a question for a qualified lawyer admitted in that jurisdiction, and state which facts the answer turns on. | |