Legal Contract Review Assistant

Problem Addressed

Contract review often gets stuck on traceability and accountability: risks are scattered across clauses, exhibits, tables, and version differences, while a single risk score can easily conflate harsh wording with illegality. This skill targets engineering and legal collaboration workflows. It fixes the review context first—reviewing party, jurisdiction, contract type, version, amount, and purpose—then produces findings that can be traced back to the source text.

How It Works

It operates inside a task directory without overwriting the original contract; annotations, redlines, and reports are written to separate outputs. The core workflow includes:
- Preflight and mode selection: choose quick, standard, or deep review. Quick mode covers high-risk items and required clauses for urgent low-value matters; deep mode adds jurisdiction verification and commercial reasonableness checks.
- Extraction and completeness checks: inspect body text, tables, exhibits, page numbers, and clause references, then separate missing clauses from present but unfavorable clauses to avoid conflating gaps with bad terms.
- Clause-level review: check authority, rights and obligations, price and tax, delivery, IP, confidentiality, data, liability, termination, and dispute resolution, with every conclusion tied to the original clause.
- Structured reporting: output an executive summary, high/medium/low risk counts, clause-specific recommendations, items pending legal/business/finance confirmation, and unverified assumptions.

Boundaries

It does not replace legal advice. Matters involving legal effect, regulatory compliance, tax, litigation outcome, or cross-border data paths must be confirmed by authorized personnel. When current law cannot be verified, mark it as not provided / unverified instead of giving a definitive conclusion.