Chinese Legal Regulation Retrieval

Problem

When engineering or operations teams ask questions such as "which clause supports a rule", "is this provision still in force", or "how do two regulations differ", raw keyword search can break up legal semantics, return noisy results, or present repealed rules as current.

How It Works

• Intent parsing: recognizes regulation lookup, legal-basis queries, validity checks, and comparison requests.
• Query structuring: extracts regulation names, conduct types, clause numbers, jurisdictions, and validity targets from natural language.
• Semantic-first retrieval: preserves full context for legal scenarios, fact patterns, disputes, and document summaries instead of mechanically tokenizing.
• CLI post-processing: uses deli-cli results to mark validity, locate clauses, summarize content, and recommend related regulations.
• Structured output: presents results as clause detail, regulation list, comparison, or validity-check templates.

Scope and Caution

This skill performs retrieval, location, and presentation only; it does not replace legal advice, contract review, or litigation strategy. It should not invent missing fields, and results need to be interpreted with validity status, applicable parties, jurisdiction, and time scope.