Senior Legal Contract Review

Problem

Contract review often fails as a checklist: a title can hide the real legal relationship, high-threshold payment protection and low-threshold protection clauses can be misread, and clause numbering can be lost in docx / pdf summarization. This skill turns review into a repeatable engineering workflow: first establish role, depth, and risk-control structure, then produce concrete clause-level edits rather than generic warnings.

How it works

• Path selection: asks whether to run quick scan, standard review, or full review instead of assuming a depth.
• Role and scope: confirms whether the user represents buyer, seller, multiple parties, or a neutral stance, then chooses revision intensity and output format.
• Deconstruction and checklist filtering: identifies the legal nature behind the title, matches contract-type checklists, and removes unrelated items before applying them.
• Search and verification: combines legal KB lookup, ancillary documents, prerequisite approvals, and counterparty judicial-risk checks to cover risks outside the signed text.
• Clause mapping: checks mandatory terms against transaction-detail sources, then outputs four-part comparisons, priorities, and a Markdown report.

Boundaries

It is useful for engineers, legal assistants, and business owners doing first-pass review, but it does not replace counsel. High-risk contracts such as guarantees, VAM agreements, non-competes, and construction deals should receive at least standard or deep review. Quick scan will state which dimensions were skipped. Missing background, prior versions, industry reports, or KB content should be marked as uncovered, not treated as nonexistent.