{"id":"a598e054-8530-44f6-9572-ba5591db6cc6","entityType":"agent","slug":"clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill","name":"Claude Legal Skill","canonicalUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/agent/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill","canonicalPath":"/agent/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill","generatedAt":"2026-10-10T02:07:35.425Z","source":"CLAWHUB","claimStatus":"UNCLAIMED","verificationTier":"NONE","summary":{"evidence":{"source":"editorial-content","verified":true,"confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":null},"description":"Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s... Skill: Claude Legal Skill Owner: youeshopent-debug Summary: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s... Tags: latest:1.0.0 Version history: v1.0.0 | 2026-04-05T19:27:54.392Z | auto Contract Review Skill v3.0.0 introduces a comprehensive framework for reviewing legal agreements, focusing on risk identif","descriptionLabel":"Technical summary","evidenceSummary":"Capability contract not published. No trust telemetry is available yet. 2K downloads reported by the source. Last updated 10/9/2026.","installCommand":"clawhub skill install s17dmcf28t60mp761zvax79q49848pn8:claude-legal-skill","sourceUrl":"https://clawhub.ai/youeshopent-debug/claude-legal-skill","homepage":"https://clawhub.ai/youeshopent-debug/skills/claude-legal-skill","primaryLinks":[{"label":"View on ClawHub","url":"https://clawhub.ai/youeshopent-debug/claude-legal-skill","kind":"source"},{"label":"Homepage","url":"https://clawhub.ai/youeshopent-debug/skills/claude-legal-skill","kind":"homepage"}],"safetyScore":84,"overallRank":62,"popularityScore":40,"trustScore":null,"claimedByName":null,"isOwner":false,"seoDescription":"Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s..."},"coverage":{"evidence":{"source":"public-profile","verified":false,"confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":null},"protocols":[{"protocol":"OPENCLEW","label":"OpenClaw","status":"self-declared","notes":"Declared in the public agent profile."}],"capabilities":[],"verifiedCount":0,"selfDeclaredCount":1,"capabilityMatrix":{"rows":[{"key":"OPENCLEW","type":"protocol","support":"unknown","confidenceSource":"profile","notes":"Listed on profile"}],"flattenedTokens":"protocol:OPENCLEW|unknown|profile"}},"adoption":{"evidence":{"source":"CLAWHUB","verified":false,"confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":null},"stars":null,"forks":null,"downloads":1975,"packageName":null,"latestVersion":"1.0.0","tractionLabel":"2K downloads"},"release":{"evidence":{"source":"CLAWHUB","verified":false,"confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":null},"lastUpdatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","lastCrawledAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","lastIndexedAt":null,"nextCrawlAt":"2026-10-10T21:33:27.018Z","lastVerifiedAt":null,"highlights":[{"version":"1.0.0","createdAt":"2026-04-05T19:27:54.392Z","changelog":"Contract Review Skill v3.0.0 introduces a comprehensive framework for reviewing legal agreements, focusing on risk identification and actionable redlines. - Adds a detailed pre-review checklist for document completeness (blank fields, missing exhibits, signature status, page check). - Guides identification of document type and user’s party/position to tailor risk analysis. - Provides clear markdown output templates, including executive summarization, key term extraction, red flags, and negotiation priorities. - Supplies quick reference checklists for common contract types (NDA, SaaS/MSA). - Recommends prioritized negotiation points and suggested redline language. - Emphasizes highlighting missing or problematic terms upfront for efficient review.","fileCount":9,"zipByteSize":19908}]},"execution":{"evidence":{"source":"CLAWHUB","verified":false,"confidence":"low","updatedAt":null,"emptyReason":"No published capability contract is available yet."},"installCommand":"clawhub skill install s17dmcf28t60mp761zvax79q49848pn8:claude-legal-skill","setupComplexity":"low","setupSteps":["Setup complexity is LOW. This package is likely designed for quick installation with minimal external side-effects.","Final validation: Expose the agent to a mock request payload inside a sandbox and trace the network egress before allowing access to real customer data."],"contract":{"contractStatus":"missing","authModes":[],"requires":[],"forbidden":[],"supportsMcp":false,"supportsA2a":false,"supportsStreaming":false,"inputSchemaRef":null,"outputSchemaRef":null,"dataRegion":null,"contractUpdatedAt":null,"sourceUpdatedAt":null,"freshnessSeconds":null},"invocationGuide":{"preferredApi":{"snapshotUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/snapshot","contractUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/contract","trustUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/trust"},"curlExamples":["curl -s \"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/snapshot\"","curl -s \"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/contract\"","curl -s \"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/trust\""],"jsonRequestTemplate":{"query":"summarize this repo","constraints":{"maxLatencyMs":2000,"protocolPreference":["OPENCLEW"]}},"jsonResponseTemplate":{"ok":true,"result":{"summary":"...","confidence":0.9},"meta":{"source":"CLAWHUB","generatedAt":"2026-10-10T02:07:35.425Z"}},"retryPolicy":{"maxAttempts":3,"backoffMs":[500,1500,3500],"retryableConditions":["HTTP_429","HTTP_503","NETWORK_TIMEOUT"]}},"endpoints":{"dossierUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/dossier","snapshotUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/snapshot","contractUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/contract","trustUrl":"https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-youeshopent-debug-claude-legal-skill/trust"}},"reliability":{"evidence":{"source":"runtime-metrics","verified":false,"confidence":"low","updatedAt":null,"emptyReason":"No trust, reliability, or runtime telemetry is available."},"trust":{"status":"unavailable","handshakeStatus":"UNKNOWN","verificationFreshnessHours":null,"reputationScore":null,"p95LatencyMs":null,"successRate30d":null,"fallbackRate":null,"attempts30d":null,"trustUpdatedAt":null,"trustConfidence":"unknown","sourceUpdatedAt":null,"freshnessSeconds":null},"decisionGuardrails":{"doNotUseIf":["Contract metadata is missing or unavailable for deterministic execution."],"safeUseWhen":[],"riskFlags":["missing_or_unavailable_contract","trust_data_unavailable","schema_references_missing"],"operationalConfidence":"low"},"executionMetrics":{"observedLatencyMsP50":null,"observedLatencyMsP95":null,"estimatedCostUsd":null,"uptime30d":null,"rateLimitRpm":null,"rateLimitBurst":null,"lastVerifiedAt":null,"verificationSource":null},"runtimeMetrics":{"successRate":null,"avgLatencyMs":null,"avgCostUsd":null,"hallucinationRate":null,"retryRate":null,"disputeRate":null,"p50Latency":null,"p95Latency":null,"lastUpdated":null}},"benchmarks":{"evidence":{"source":"no-benchmark-data","verified":false,"confidence":"low","updatedAt":null,"emptyReason":"No benchmark suites or observed failure patterns are available."},"suites":[],"failurePatterns":[]},"artifacts":{"evidence":{"source":"CLAWHUB","verified":false,"confidence":"high","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":null},"readme":"Skill: Claude Legal Skill\n\nOwner: youeshopent-debug\n\nSummary: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s...\n\nTags: latest:1.0.0\n\nVersion history:\n\nv1.0.0 | 2026-04-05T19:27:54.392Z | auto\n\nContract Review Skill v3.0.0 introduces a comprehensive framework for reviewing legal agreements, focusing on risk identification and actionable redlines.\n\n- Adds a detailed pre-review checklist for document completeness (blank fields, missing exhibits, signature status, page check).\n- Guides identification of document type and user’s party/position to tailor risk analysis.\n- Provides clear markdown output templates, including executive summarization, key term extraction, red flags, and negotiation priorities.\n- Supplies quick reference checklists for common contract types (NDA, SaaS/MSA).\n- Recommends prioritized negotiation points and suggested redline language.\n- Emphasizes highlighting missing or problematic terms upfront for efficient review.\n\nArchive index:\n\nArchive v1.0.0: 9 files, 19908 bytes\n\nFiles: CHANGELOG.md (1472b), examples/balanced-agreement.md (3019b), examples/ma-agreement-review.md (4645b), examples/nda-review.md (3367b), examples/saas-agreement-review.md (3857b), README.md (8002b), skill-card.md (2746b), skill.md (14933b), _meta.json (137b)\n\nFile v1.0.0:skill.md\n\n---\r\nname: contract-review\r\ndescription: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market standards. Use for contract analysis, due diligence, or negotiation prep.\r\nversion: 3.0.0\r\n---\r\n\r\n# Contract Review Skill\r\n\r\nReview legal contracts for risks, extract key terms, and suggest redlines. Built on the CUAD dataset (41 risk categories), ContractEval benchmarks, and LegalBench.\r\n\r\n## When to Activate\r\n\r\n- User mentions \"review contract\", \"analyze agreement\", \"check this contract\"\r\n- User uploads or references a PDF/DOCX legal document\r\n- User asks about specific clauses, risks, or terms\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Step 1: Pre-Review Checklist\r\n\r\nBefore analyzing content, verify document completeness:\r\n\r\n- [ ] **Blank fields**: Flag any \"$X\", \"TBD\", \"[amount]\", \"____\" placeholders\r\n- [ ] **Missing exhibits**: List all referenced schedules/exhibits and note which are missing\r\n- [ ] **Signature status**: Draft or already executed?\r\n- [ ] **All pages present**: Check for truncation or missing sections\r\n\r\nIf blank fields or missing exhibits exist, flag prominently in output header.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Step 2: Identify Document Type & User Position\r\n\r\n**Ask if unclear:** \"Which party are you? (customer, vendor, buyer, seller, licensor, licensee, receiving party, disclosing party)\"\r\n\r\nThis affects what's \"risky\":\r\n- Customer reviewing vendor agreement → flag vendor-favorable terms\r\n- Vendor reviewing own template → flag customer-favorable terms\r\n- Buyer in M&A → flag seller-favorable terms\r\n- Seller in M&A → flag buyer-favorable terms\r\n- Receiving party in NDA → flag disclosing party-favorable terms\r\n\r\n**Assess power dynamic:**\r\n- Startup vs. large enterprise? (limited negotiating leverage)\r\n- Standard form vs. negotiated? (some terms non-negotiable)\r\n- Regulated industry? (some terms legally required)\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Output Format\r\n\r\nUse **markdown** for readable, scannable output. Do NOT use XML tags.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: [Document Name]\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** SaaS Subscription Agreement\r\n**Your Position:** Customer\r\n**Counterparty:** Acme Software Inc.\r\n**Risk Level:** 🟡 Medium\r\n**Document Status:** Draft / Executed on [date]\r\n\r\n## ⚠️ Pre-Signing Alerts\r\n\r\n- **Blank field:** Fee amount in Section 4.1 is \"$____\"\r\n- **Missing exhibit:** Exhibit B (SLA) referenced but not attached\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\nStandard vendor agreement with some one-sided terms. The 3-month liability cap and\r\nasymmetric termination rights need attention. Data ownership is clear.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Initial Term | 12 months | Section 8.1 |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | 12-month periods, 60-day notice | Section 8.2 |\r\n| Liability Cap | 3 months' fees | Section 10.2 |\r\n| Governing Law | Delaware | Section 12.1 |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Red Flags (Quick Scan)\r\n\r\n| Flag | Found | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Liability cap < 6 months | ⚠️ Yes | Section 10.2 |\r\n| Uncapped indemnification | No | — |\r\n| Unilateral amendment rights | ⚠️ Yes | Section 14.1 |\r\n| No termination for convenience | No | — |\r\n| Perpetual obligations | No | — |\r\n| Offshore jurisdiction | No | — |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Analysis\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**Limitation of Liability** (Section 10.2)\r\n> \"Liability shall not exceed fees paid in the preceding three (3) months\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** 3-month cap is below market standard (typically 12 months)\r\n- **Risk:** For $120K annual contract, liability capped at $30K\r\n- **Market Standard:** 12 months' fees\r\n- **Negotiability:** Medium — most vendors accept 6-12 months\r\n- **Redline:** Change \"three (3) months\" → \"twelve (12) months\"\r\n- **Fallback:** Accept 6 months as compromise\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Termination for Convenience** (Section 8.5)\r\n> \"Vendor may terminate for any reason upon 30 days notice\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** One-sided; customer lacks equivalent right\r\n- **Market Standard:** Mutual termination rights\r\n- **Negotiability:** High — reasonable ask\r\n- **Redline:** Add \"Either party may terminate...\" or change to \"90 days\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟢 Reviewed & Acceptable\r\n\r\n| Category | Status | Notes |\r\n|----------|--------|-------|\r\n| Data Ownership | ✓ | Customer owns all customer data |\r\n| IP Rights | ✓ | Clear separation, no broad assignment |\r\n| Confidentiality | ✓ | Mutual, 3-year term, standard exceptions |\r\n| Governing Law | ✓ | Delaware — neutral for commercial |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Missing Provisions\r\n\r\n| Provision | Priority | Why It Matters |\r\n|-----------|----------|----------------|\r\n| Data Export Rights | Critical | No guaranteed way to get data out on termination |\r\n| SLA Credits | Important | 99.9% uptime stated but no remedy for breach |\r\n| Price Increase Cap | Important | Renewal pricing uncapped |\r\n\r\n**Suggested language for Data Export:**\r\n> \"Upon termination, Vendor shall make Customer Data available for export in CSV or JSON format for 90 days at no additional charge.\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Internal Consistency Issues\r\n\r\n- ⚠️ Section 5.2 references \"Exhibit C\" but no Exhibit C exists\r\n- ⚠️ \"Confidential Information\" defined in Section 3.1 but used lowercase in Section 7\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Negotiation Priority\r\n\r\n| # | Issue | Ask | Negotiability |\r\n|---|-------|-----|---------------|\r\n| 1 | Liability cap | 12 months | Medium |\r\n| 2 | Termination rights | Mutual | High |\r\n| 3 | Data export | Add provision | High |\r\n| 4 | Price cap | 5% annual max | Medium |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n*This review is for informational purposes only. Material terms should be reviewed by qualified legal counsel.*\r\n```\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Red Flags Quick Scan\r\n\r\nCheck these danger signs FIRST before deep analysis:\r\n\r\n| Red Flag | Why It Matters |\r\n|----------|----------------|\r\n| Liability cap < 6 months | Inadequate protection |\r\n| Uncapped indemnification | Unlimited exposure |\r\n| \"As-is\" with no warranty | No recourse for defects |\r\n| Unilateral suspension without notice | Service can vanish |\r\n| Unilateral amendment rights | Terms can change |\r\n| No termination for convenience | Locked in |\r\n| Perpetual obligations (tails, non-competes) | Indefinite exposure |\r\n| Offshore jurisdiction (BVI, Cayman) | Expensive to enforce |\r\n| Pre-signed conflict waivers | No recourse for conflicts |\r\n| \"Sole discretion\" language favoring counterparty | No objective standard |\r\n| Class action waiver + mandatory arbitration | Limited remedies |\r\n| Asymmetric assignment rights | They can assign, you can't |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Document Type Checklists\r\n\r\n### NDA Checklist\r\n\r\n| Category | Check For |\r\n|----------|-----------|\r\n| Direction | One-way or mutual? |\r\n| Definition scope | \"All information\" too broad? Standard exceptions? |\r\n| Term | 2 years short, 3-5 typical, indefinite for trade secrets |\r\n| Permitted disclosure | \"Representatives\" defined? Flow-down required? |\r\n| Residuals clause | Can use general knowledge retained in memory? |\r\n| Non-solicitation | Employees protected? |\r\n| Standstill | Prevents hostile acquisition actions? |\r\n| No-contact | Customers, suppliers, employees protected? |\r\n| Return/destruction | Certification required? |\r\n| Public announcement | Prohibits disclosure of discussions? |\r\n| Compelled disclosure | Notice required? Time to seek protective order? |\r\n| Injunctive relief | Pre-agreed specific performance? Bond waiver? |\r\n\r\n### SaaS/MSA Checklist\r\n\r\n| Category | Check For |\r\n|----------|-----------|\r\n| Liability cap | 12+ months = standard |\r\n| Uptime SLA | 99.9% with credits = standard |\r\n| Suspension rights | Unilateral? Notice required? |\r\n| Data ownership | Customer owns customer data? |\r\n| Data export | Format, duration, cost on termination? |\r\n| Price increases | Capped? Notice period? |\r\n| Auto-renewal notice | 90+ days = good, <60 = risk |\r\n| Termination | Mutual for convenience? Cure period for cause? |\r\n| Subprocessors | Notice of changes? Approval rights? |\r\n| Insurance | Vendor carries E&O, cyber? |\r\n\r\n### Payment/Merchant Agreement Checklist\r\n\r\n| Category | Check For |\r\n|----------|-----------|\r\n| Reserve/holdback | Amount, duration, release conditions? |\r\n| Chargeback liability | Capped? Fraud protection? |\r\n| Network rules | Incorporated by reference? Access provided? |\r\n| Auto-debit authority | Notice before debits? |\r\n| Settlement timing | When do you receive funds? |\r\n| Volume commitments | Realistic? Penalty for shortfall? |\r\n| Suspension rights | Immediate or notice? |\r\n| Termination tail | How long do obligations survive? |\r\n| Audit rights | Frequency, notice, cost allocation? |\r\n| PCI compliance | Who bears cost? |\r\n\r\n### M&A Agreement Checklist\r\n\r\n| Category | Check For |\r\n|----------|-----------|\r\n| Purchase price | Cash vs. stock vs. earnout mix? |\r\n| Earnout mechanics | Measurement, discretion, audit rights, acceleration? |\r\n| Escrow/holdback | Amount (10-15% typical), duration (12-18 mo), release? |\r\n| Rep survival | 12-24 months general, longer for fundamental |\r\n| Indemnification cap | 10-20% of purchase price typical |\r\n| Basket type | True deductible vs. tipping? |\r\n| Sandbagging | Pro-buyer or anti-sandbagging? |\r\n| Non-compete | 2-3 years, geographic scope? |\r\n| Working capital | Target, collar, true-up mechanism? |\r\n| MAC definition | Carve-outs for market conditions? |\r\n| Employment comp | Counted in purchase price or separate? |\r\n\r\n### Finder/Broker Agreement Checklist\r\n\r\n| Category | Check For |\r\n|----------|-----------|\r\n| Fee percentage | Specified or blank? |\r\n| Fee calculation | What's included in deal value? Employment comp? |\r\n| \"Covered buyer\" definition | How broad? Any prior relationship carve-out? |\r\n| Tail period | 12-24 months typical; perpetual = red flag |\r\n| Exclusivity | Exclusive or non-exclusive? |\r\n| Minimum fee | Floor amount? |\r\n| Joint representation | Consent required? Conflict waiver? |\r\n| Escrow deduction | Auto-pay from proceeds? |\r\n| Term/termination | Can you exit? |\r\n| Broker status | BD registered if securities involved? |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Categories (CUAD 41 + Extensions)\r\n\r\n### Document Basics\r\n- Document Name and Type\r\n- Parties (legal names, roles)\r\n- Agreement Date / Effective Date\r\n- Expiration Date\r\n- Renewal Terms\r\n- **Document Status** (draft/executed)\r\n- **Blank Fields / Placeholders**\r\n\r\n### Term & Termination\r\n- Contract Term / Duration\r\n- Termination for Convenience\r\n- Termination for Cause\r\n- Post-Termination Services\r\n- Survival Clauses\r\n- **Suspension Rights** (immediate vs. with notice)\r\n- **Cure Periods**\r\n\r\n### Assignment & Control\r\n- Anti-Assignment Clause\r\n- Change of Control\r\n- Consent Requirements\r\n- **Asymmetric Assignment** (they can, you can't)\r\n\r\n### Financial Terms\r\n- Payment Terms\r\n- Price Restrictions / Adjustments\r\n- Most Favored Nation (MFN)\r\n- Minimum Commitment\r\n- Volume Restrictions\r\n- Audit Rights\r\n- **Price Escalation Caps**\r\n- **Reserve/Holdback Requirements**\r\n- **Auto-Debit Authority**\r\n\r\n### Liability & Risk\r\n- Limitation of Liability\r\n- Cap on Liability\r\n- Uncapped Liability Carve-outs\r\n- Indemnification\r\n- Insurance Requirements\r\n- Warranty Duration\r\n- **Warranty Disclaimer (As-Is)**\r\n- **Exclusive Remedy Clauses**\r\n- **Chargeback/Return Liability**\r\n\r\n### IP & Confidentiality\r\n- IP Ownership Assignment\r\n- License Grant\r\n- Affiliate License - Licensor/Licensee\r\n- Covenant Not To Sue\r\n- Non-Compete\r\n- Non-Solicitation (Employees/Customers)\r\n- Competitive Restriction Exception\r\n- Exclusivity\r\n- Non-Disparagement\r\n- Confidentiality Duration\r\n- Third Party Beneficiary\r\n- **Residuals Clause**\r\n- **Feedback Ownership**\r\n\r\n### Dispute Resolution\r\n- Governing Law\r\n- Jurisdiction / Venue\r\n- Arbitration vs Litigation\r\n- Jury Trial Waiver\r\n- **Class Action Waiver**\r\n- **Offshore Jurisdiction Flags**\r\n\r\n### Special Provisions\r\n- ROFR / ROFO / ROFN\r\n- Revenue/Profit Sharing\r\n- Joint IP Ownership\r\n- Source Code Escrow\r\n- Irrevocable or Perpetual License\r\n- **Data Export Rights**\r\n- **Uptime/Availability SLA**\r\n- **Sublicensing Rights**\r\n- **Unilateral Amendment Rights**\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Market Standard Benchmarks\r\n\r\n| Provision | Standard | Yellow Flag | Red Flag |\r\n|-----------|----------|-------------|----------|\r\n| **Liability cap** | 12 months' fees | 6-11 months | <6 months |\r\n| **Non-compete duration** | 1-2 years | 3-4 years | 5+ years |\r\n| **Non-compete geography** | Where business operates | State-wide | Nationwide |\r\n| **Auto-renewal notice** | 90+ days | 60-89 days | <60 days |\r\n| **Termination notice** | Mutual, 60-90 days | One-sided, 30 days | Immediate |\r\n| **Indemnification** | Mutual, capped | Asymmetric | Uncapped |\r\n| **Rep survival (M&A)** | 12-18 months general | 24-30 months | 36+ months |\r\n| **Escrow (M&A)** | 10-15% for 12-18 mo | 15-20% for 18-24 mo | >20% or >24 mo |\r\n| **Confidentiality (NDA)** | 3 years general | 2 years | 5+ years |\r\n| **Fee tail (broker)** | 12-18 months | 24 months | Perpetual |\r\n| **SLA uptime** | 99.9% with credits | 99.5% | No SLA |\r\n| **Data export** | 90 days, standard format | 30 days | None |\r\n| **Price increase cap** | CPI or 5% annual | 10% annual | Uncapped |\r\n| **Cure period** | 30 days | 15 days | None |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Negotiability Guide\r\n\r\n| Rating | Meaning | Examples |\r\n|--------|---------|----------|\r\n| **High** | Usually accepted | Mutual termination, cure periods, data export |\r\n| **Medium** | Depends on leverage | Liability cap increase, price caps |\r\n| **Low** | Rarely changed | Network rules (payments), regulatory requirements |\r\n| **None** | Non-negotiable | Card network mandates, banking regulations |\r\n\r\n**Power dynamic factors:**\r\n- Large customer + small vendor = more leverage\r\n- Startup + enterprise vendor = less leverage\r\n- Competitive market = more leverage\r\n- Sole-source vendor = less leverage\r\n- Regulated terms = no leverage (legally required)\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Jurisdiction Notes\r\n\r\n**Non-Competes:**\r\n- California, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Minnesota: Generally void\r\n- Other states: Reasonableness test applies\r\n\r\n**Choice of Law:**\r\n- Delaware: Corp-friendly, predictable\r\n- New York: Financial agreements, sophisticated courts\r\n- California: Employee-friendly, tech industry\r\n- BVI/Cayman: Offshore, expensive to litigate, potential red flag\r\n\r\n**Arbitration Venues:**\r\n- AAA, JAMS: Standard US commercial\r\n- SIAC (Singapore), LCIA (London): International, expensive\r\n- Mandatory + class waiver: Limits remedies significantly\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Guardrails\r\n\r\n- **Not legal advice**: Recommend attorney review for material terms\r\n- **Not tax advice**: Flag but don't opine\r\n- **Jurisdiction matters**: Note when enforceability varies\r\n- **Express uncertainty**: Say when interpretation is unclear\r\n- **No hallucination**: Only reference text actually in document\r\n- **Show what's acceptable**: Always include \"Reviewed & Acceptable\" section\r\n- **Document status matters**: Note if already executed (review is informational)\n\nFile v1.0.0:README.md\n\n# Contract Review — Agent Skill for Legal Analysis\r\n\r\n> AI-powered contract review with CUAD risk detection, market benchmarks, and lawyer-ready redlines\r\n\r\n[![GitHub stars](https://img.shields.io/github/stars/evolsb/claude-legal-skill)](https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill/stargazers)\r\n[![License: MIT](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-MIT-yellow.svg)](LICENSE)\r\n[![Agent Skills](https://img.shields.io/badge/Agent%20Skills-Compatible-blueviolet)](https://agentskills.io)\r\n[![CUAD](https://img.shields.io/badge/CUAD-41%20Categories-green)](https://github.com/TheAtticusProject/cuad)\r\n[![Version](https://img.shields.io/badge/version-3.0.0-blue)]()\r\n\r\n**Works with:** Claude Code · OpenAI Codex · Cursor · GitHub Copilot · Gemini CLI · [26+ tools](https://agentskills.io)\r\n\r\n## Quick Install\r\n\r\n```bash\r\n# Claude Code\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.claude/skills/contract-review\r\n\r\n# OpenAI Codex\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.codex/skills/contract-review\r\n\r\n# Other Agent Skills-compatible tools — clone to your tool's skills directory\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Try It\r\n\r\n```\r\nReview this NDA - I'm the receiving party\r\n```\r\n\r\n### Example Output\r\n\r\n![Demo output showing contract review with red flags, risk analysis, and redline suggestions](examples/demo.png)\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Why This Exists\r\n\r\nI was reviewing real contracts — NDAs, SaaS agreements, M&A docs, merchant agreements — and wanted AI assistance directly in my coding workflow. So I researched what was available:\r\n\r\n- **Commercial legal AI** (Kira, Ironclad, LegalOn, Harvey, Spellbook) — enterprise-only, custom quotes, no API access for individual developers\r\n- **Open source tools** (LexNLP, OpenContracts, LawGlance) — incomplete projects requiring significant integration work, none designed for AI coding assistants\r\n- **Generic contract checklists** — one-size-fits-all reviews that don't differentiate between an NDA and an M&A agreement, give the same advice to buyers and sellers, and say \"negotiate this\" without telling you *what to ask for*\r\n\r\nNothing worked as a drop-in skill. So I built one grounded in the [CUAD dataset](https://github.com/TheAtticusProject/cuad) (41 legal risk categories from 510 real contracts), tested it against actual agreements, and iterated until the output was useful for real negotiations.\r\n\r\nThe result: position-aware review with market benchmarks, document-type checklists, and actual redline language — not just a list of issues.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## What It Does\r\n\r\nAnalyzes legal contracts and outputs:\r\n- **Risk assessment** with severity ratings (🔴 Critical / 🟡 Important / 🟢 Acceptable)\r\n- **Red flags quick scan** — instant danger sign detection\r\n- **Key terms table** with section references\r\n- **Market standard benchmarks** — how terms compare to industry norms\r\n- **Negotiability ratings** — what's realistic to change given power dynamics\r\n- **Specific redlines** — actual replacement language, not just \"negotiate this\"\r\n- **Missing provisions** with suggested language to add\r\n- **Internal consistency checks** (broken cross-references, undefined terms)\r\n\r\n### Generate Deliverables with legal-redline-tools\r\n\r\nThis skill outputs structured JSON redlines. To produce the tracked-changes Word docs and redline PDFs that lawyers actually send, pair with [**legal-redline-tools**](https://github.com/evolsb/legal-redline-tools):\r\n\r\n```bash\r\npip install git+https://github.com/evolsb/legal-redline-tools.git\r\n\r\n# After the skill generates redlines.json:\r\nlegal-redline apply contract.docx redlined.docx \\\r\n    --from-json redlines.json \\\r\n    --pdf redline.pdf \\\r\n    --memo-pdf internal-memo.pdf\r\n```\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Features\r\n\r\n### Position-Aware Review\r\nTell it which party you are (customer, vendor, buyer, seller, receiving party) — the skill adjusts what it flags as risky.\r\n\r\n### Document Type Checklists\r\nSpecialized checklists for each contract type:\r\n- **NDA** — confidentiality term, non-solicitation, standstill, destruction certification\r\n- **SaaS/MSA** — SLA, data export, suspension rights, price caps\r\n- **Payment/Merchant** — reserves, chargebacks, network rules, auto-debit\r\n- **M&A** — earnouts, escrow, rep survival, sandbagging\r\n- **Finder/Broker** — fee tails, covered buyer definitions, joint representation\r\n\r\n### Market Standard Benchmarks\r\nCompares terms to industry norms with clear thresholds:\r\n\r\n| Provision | Standard | Yellow | Red |\r\n|-----------|----------|--------|-----|\r\n| Liability cap | 12 months | 6-11 mo | <6 mo |\r\n| Auto-renewal notice | 90+ days | 60-89 | <60 |\r\n| Non-compete | 1-2 years | 3-4 years | 5+ |\r\n| Rep survival (M&A) | 12-18 mo | 24-30 mo | 36+ mo |\r\n\r\n### Negotiability Ratings\r\nTells you what's actually changeable:\r\n- **High** — Mutual termination, cure periods, data export\r\n- **Medium** — Liability cap increases, price caps\r\n- **Low** — Network rules, regulatory requirements\r\n\r\n### Red Flags Quick Scan\r\nInstant detection of danger signs:\r\n- Liability cap < 6 months\r\n- Uncapped indemnification\r\n- Unilateral amendment rights\r\n- Perpetual obligations\r\n- Offshore jurisdiction (BVI, Cayman)\r\n\r\n### Jurisdiction Awareness\r\nFlags when governing law affects enforceability:\r\n- Non-competes void in CA/ND/OK/MN\r\n- Delaware vs NY vs CA implications\r\n- Offshore jurisdiction cost/enforcement concerns\r\n\r\n### M&A Support\r\nSpecial handling for acquisition agreements:\r\n- Earnout mechanics and measurement\r\n- Rep & warranty survival periods\r\n- Working capital adjustments\r\n- Escrow/holdback provisions\r\n- Employment comp in deal value calculations\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Installation\r\n\r\nThis skill follows the open [Agent Skills standard](https://agentskills.io) and works with any compatible tool.\r\n\r\n```bash\r\n# Claude Code\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.claude/skills/contract-review\r\n\r\n# OpenAI Codex\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.codex/skills/contract-review\r\n\r\n# Cursor, Copilot, Gemini CLI, etc.\r\n# Clone to your tool's skills directory\r\n```\r\n\r\n### Development (Symlink)\r\n```bash\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/Developer/claude-legal-skill\r\nln -s ~/Developer/claude-legal-skill ~/.claude/skills/contract-review\r\n```\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Usage Examples\r\n\r\n```\r\nReview this NDA for red flags - I'm the receiving party\r\n\r\nAnalyze the indemnification in this MSA - I'm the vendor\r\n\r\nWhat are the termination provisions? I'm the customer.\r\n\r\nReview this acquisition agreement - I'm the seller\r\n\r\nCheck this merchant agreement - what's my chargeback exposure?\r\n```\r\n\r\nSee [examples/](examples/) for full sample outputs.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Limitations\r\n\r\n- **Not legal advice** — always have material terms reviewed by qualified counsel\r\n- **US law focus** — analysis defaults to US; provisions vary by jurisdiction\r\n- **Context window** — very long contracts may need section-by-section review\r\n\r\n## Accuracy\r\n\r\nBased on ContractEval benchmarks, Claude achieves F1 ~0.62 on clause extraction. Best for first-pass review and issue flagging — not a replacement for attorney review on material deals.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Credits\r\n\r\n- [CUAD Dataset](https://github.com/TheAtticusProject/cuad) — Atticus Project (NeurIPS 2021)\r\n- [LegalBench](https://hazyresearch.stanford.edu/legalbench/) — Stanford HAI\r\n- [ContractEval](https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.07389) — Contract understanding benchmarks\r\n\r\n## Next Steps\r\n\r\n- **Need deliverables?** Use [legal-redline-tools](https://github.com/evolsb/legal-redline-tools) to generate tracked-changes `.docx`, redline PDFs, and negotiation memos from the skill's output\r\n- **Want examples?** See [examples/](examples/) for full sample reviews\r\n- **Found an issue?** [Open a GitHub issue](https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill/issues)\r\n\r\n## Contact\r\n\r\nQuestions or feedback? [Open an issue](https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill/issues) or email chris@ctsheehan.com.\r\n\r\n## License\r\n\r\nMIT — see [LICENSE](LICENSE)\n\nFile v1.0.0:_meta.json\n\n{\n  \"ownerId\": \"kn72f3rrn1s6vm4d9dv362bc3x82k7p4\",\n  \"slug\": \"claude-legal-skill\",\n  \"version\": \"1.0.0\",\n  \"publishedAt\": 1775417274392\n}\n\nFile v1.0.0:CHANGELOG.md\n\n# Changelog\r\n\r\n## [3.0.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- \"Why This Exists\" backstory section in README\r\n- Multi-platform support via [Agent Skills standard](https://agentskills.io) (26+ tools)\r\n- Full example outputs for NDA, SaaS, M&A, and balanced agreements\r\n- Optimized skill description for Claude Code discovery\r\n\r\n### Changed\r\n- Complete rewrite of skill.md based on real-world contract testing\r\n- Position-aware analysis now adjusts for power dynamics\r\n- Market benchmark thresholds refined from actual negotiation outcomes\r\n- Redline suggestions include fallback positions\r\n\r\n## [2.1.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- Markdown output format with severity badges\r\n- shields.io badges and GitHub topics for discoverability\r\n- Link to examples folder in README\r\n\r\n## [2.0.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- Position-aware review (customer/vendor/buyer/seller)\r\n- Complete CUAD 41-category coverage\r\n- Document-type checklists (NDA, SaaS, M&A, Payment, Finder/Broker)\r\n- Market standard benchmarks with color-coded thresholds\r\n- Negotiability ratings (High/Medium/Low)\r\n- Red flags quick scan\r\n- Jurisdiction awareness\r\n- M&A-specific support (earnouts, escrow, rep survival)\r\n\r\n### Changed\r\n- Improved redline language with specific replacement text\r\n- Better severity classification (Critical/Important/Acceptable)\r\n\r\n## [1.0.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- Initial release\r\n- Basic contract review with risk detection\r\n- Key terms extraction\r\n- CUAD dataset integration\n\nFile v1.0.0:examples/balanced-agreement.md\n\n# Balanced Agreement Example — Low Risk\r\n\r\nShows what a well-balanced contract looks like and how to report acceptable terms.\r\n\r\n## Prompt\r\n\r\n```\r\nI'm the customer. Review this SaaS agreement.\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: Acme Cloud Platform Agreement\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** SaaS Subscription Agreement\r\n**Your Position:** Customer\r\n**Counterparty:** Acme Software Inc.\r\n**Risk Level:** 🟢 Low\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\nWell-balanced commercial agreement with mutual protections. Terms are within market\r\nstandards for enterprise SaaS. Minor points exist but no critical issues.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Initial Term | 12 months | Section 8.1 |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | 12-month periods, 90-day notice | Section 8.2 |\r\n| Liability Cap | 12 months' fees | Section 10.2 |\r\n| SLA | 99.9% uptime, 10% credits | Exhibit B |\r\n| Governing Law | Delaware | Section 12.1 |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Analysis\r\n\r\n### 🟢 Minor\r\n\r\n**Price Adjustments** (Section 4.5)\r\n> \"Vendor may adjust pricing upon renewal with 60 days notice, not to exceed 5% annually\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** Price increases capped but could compound over time\r\n- **Assessment:** 5% cap is reasonable; this is low risk\r\n- **Optional ask:** CPI-linked cap instead of flat 5%\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Reviewed & Acceptable\r\n\r\n| Category | Status | Notes |\r\n|----------|--------|-------|\r\n| Limitation of Liability | ✓ | 12-month cap — market standard |\r\n| Indemnification | ✓ | Mutual with reasonable scope |\r\n| Data Ownership | ✓ | Customer owns all customer data |\r\n| Data Export | ✓ | 90-day export period, standard formats |\r\n| Termination | ✓ | Mutual for convenience with 90 days notice |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | ✓ | 90-day notice period is adequate |\r\n| SLA | ✓ | 99.9% with meaningful credits |\r\n| Governing Law | ✓ | Delaware — neutral for commercial |\r\n| IP Rights | ✓ | Customer retains all IP in data/configs |\r\n| Confidentiality | ✓ | Mutual, 3-year term, standard exceptions |\r\n| Assignment | ✓ | Consent required, CoC exception |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Missing Provisions\r\n\r\nNone critical. Agreement is comprehensive.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n*This review is for informational purposes only. Material terms should be reviewed by qualified legal counsel.*\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Key Lesson\r\n\r\nNot every contract needs extensive redlines. When terms are balanced:\r\n\r\n1. **Show what's acceptable** — the \"Reviewed & Acceptable\" table builds confidence\r\n2. **Don't over-flag** — minor issues stay 🟢, not everything is 🔴\r\n3. **Provide context** — explain why terms are fine\r\n4. **Save negotiation capital** — push back only on truly problematic terms\r\n\r\n## Signs of a Balanced Agreement\r\n\r\n- Mutual obligations (indemnification, confidentiality, termination)\r\n- 12-month liability cap (market standard for SaaS)\r\n- 60-90 day notice periods\r\n- Clear data ownership and export rights\r\n- Meaningful SLA with actual remedies\r\n- Price increase caps\r\n- Neither party has dramatically more power\n\nFile v1.0.0:examples/ma-agreement-review.md\n\n# M&A Agreement Review Example\r\n\r\n## Prompt\r\n\r\n```\r\nReview this acquisition agreement. I'm the seller.\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: Asset Purchase Agreement\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** Asset Purchase Agreement\r\n**Your Position:** Seller\r\n**Counterparty:** Acquirer Inc.\r\n**Risk Level:** 🔴 High\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\n$15M acquisition with 30% earnout, 18-month escrow, and 3-year rep survival.\r\nSignificant seller exposure post-closing. Earnout mechanics need protection.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Base Purchase Price | $10,500,000 cash at closing | Section 2.1(a) |\r\n| Earnout | Up to $4,500,000 (Y1-Y2 revenue) | Section 2.1(b) |\r\n| Escrow | $1,575,000 (15%) for 18 months | Section 2.1(c) |\r\n| Indemnification Cap | $3,000,000 (20% of total) | Section 10.4 |\r\n| Rep Survival | 36 months | Section 10.2 |\r\n| Non-Compete | 5 years, nationwide | Section 7.8 |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Analysis\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**Earnout Mechanics** (Section 2.1(b), Exhibit C)\r\n> \"Earnout shall be calculated based on Revenue as determined by Buyer in its sole discretion\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** No objective standard; buyer controls calculation; no audit rights\r\n- **Risk:** Buyer can manipulate to minimize earnout\r\n- **Redline:** Add:\r\n  - \"Revenue calculated per GAAP, consistent with historical practices\"\r\n  - \"Seller audit rights within 30 days of each calculation\"\r\n  - \"Buyer shall operate business consistent with past practice\"\r\n  - \"Earnout accelerates in full upon change of control\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**Rep & Warranty Survival** (Section 10.2)\r\n> \"All representations and warranties shall survive for 36 months\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** 3-year survival is longer than market (12-18 months typical)\r\n- **Redline:** Change to \"18 months for general reps; 36 months only for fundamental reps (title, authority, cap)\"\r\n- **Fallback:** Accept 24 months\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**Non-Compete** (Section 7.8)\r\n> \"Seller shall not engage in any competitive business for 5 years anywhere in the United States\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** 5-year nationwide non-compete may be unenforceable; exceeds market (2-3 years)\r\n- **Redline:**\r\n  - Duration: \"five (5) years\" → \"three (3) years\"\r\n  - Geography: \"United States\" → \"states where Business operates\"\r\n  - Add clear definition of \"competitive\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Sandbagging** (Section 10.5)\r\n> \"Buyer's right to indemnification shall not be affected by any investigation or knowledge\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** Pro-sandbagging lets buyer claim for issues known pre-close\r\n- **Redline:** Add anti-sandbagging: \"Buyer may not seek indemnification for matters actually known to Buyer prior to Closing\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Basket Structure** (Section 10.4)\r\n> \"First dollar basket of $150,000\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** First-dollar (tipping) basket means once threshold met, buyer recovers from dollar one\r\n- **Redline:** Convert to true deductible: \"Seller liable only for amounts exceeding $150,000\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Reviewed & Acceptable\r\n\r\n| Category | Status | Notes |\r\n|----------|--------|-------|\r\n| Escrow Amount | ✓ | 15% is within market range |\r\n| Escrow Duration | ✓ | 18 months is standard |\r\n| Indemnification Cap | ✓ | 20% is reasonable |\r\n| Governing Law | ✓ | Delaware |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Missing Provisions\r\n\r\n| Provision | Priority | Suggested Language |\r\n|-----------|----------|-------------------|\r\n| Earnout Operating Covenants | Critical | \"Buyer shall operate Business consistent with past practice and not take actions primarily intended to reduce Earnout\" |\r\n| R&W Insurance Acknowledgment | Important | \"Buyer shall first seek recovery under R&W insurance before asserting claims against Seller\" |\r\n| Earnout Acceleration | Important | \"Upon change of control of Buyer, unpaid Earnout accelerates at target amount\" |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n*This review is for informational purposes only. M&A transactions require qualified legal and tax counsel.*\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Seller Protection Checklist\r\n\r\n1. **Maximize cash at close** — earnouts, escrows, holdbacks reduce certainty\r\n2. **Earnout protections** — operating covenants, audit rights, acceleration\r\n3. **Short rep survival** — 12-18 months general, longer only for fundamental\r\n4. **True deductible basket** — not first-dollar/tipping\r\n5. **Reasonable indemnification cap** — 10-15% excluding fraud\r\n6. **Anti-sandbagging** — buyer can't claim for known issues\r\n7. **Reasonable non-compete** — 2-3 years, limited geography\r\n8. **Partial escrow release** — at 12 months if no claims\r\n9. **D&O tail** — buyer to purchase or fund\n\nFile v1.0.0:examples/nda-review.md\n\n# NDA Review Example\r\n\r\n## Prompt\r\n\r\n```\r\nReview this NDA for red flags. I'm the receiving party.\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: Mutual Non-Disclosure Agreement\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** Mutual NDA\r\n**Your Position:** Receiving Party\r\n**Counterparty:** Acme Corp\r\n**Risk Level:** 🟡 Medium\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\nMutual NDA with some one-sided provisions favoring the disclosing party. The 5-year\r\nconfidentiality period and hidden non-solicitation clause need attention.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Term | 2 years | Section 5 |\r\n| Confidentiality Survival | 5 years post-termination | Section 5.2 |\r\n| Governing Law | New York | Section 8 |\r\n| Definition Scope | \"All information disclosed\" — very broad | Section 1.1 |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Analysis\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Confidentiality Duration** (Section 5.2)\r\n> \"The obligations of confidentiality shall survive for five (5) years following termination\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** 5-year survival is longer than standard (2-3 years for general business info)\r\n- **Redline:** Change \"five (5) years\" → \"three (3) years\"\r\n- **Alternative:** Add carve-out: \"except for trade secrets, which shall survive indefinitely\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**Non-Solicitation** (Section 6.3)\r\n> \"Receiving Party shall not solicit any employees of Disclosing Party for 12 months\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** Non-solicitation is unusual in an NDA; may be unenforceable in some states\r\n- **Redline:** Delete entire Section 6.3\r\n- **Fallback:** Limit to \"shall not directly solicit employees with whom Receiving Party had contact during discussions\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Broad Definition** (Section 1.1)\r\n> \"Confidential Information means all information disclosed by either party, whether oral, written, or electronic\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** \"All information\" without carve-outs could include publicly available info\r\n- **Redline:** Add standard exceptions: \"(a) publicly available; (b) already known; (c) independently developed; (d) received from third party\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Reviewed & Acceptable\r\n\r\n| Category | Status | Notes |\r\n|----------|--------|-------|\r\n| Mutual Obligations | ✓ | Both parties bound equally |\r\n| Return/Destruction | ✓ | Standard 30-day requirement |\r\n| Injunctive Relief | ✓ | Reasonable — acknowledges irreparable harm |\r\n| Governing Law | ✓ | New York — standard for commercial |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Missing Provisions\r\n\r\n| Provision | Priority | Suggested Language |\r\n|-----------|----------|-------------------|\r\n| Residuals Clause | Important | \"Nothing restricts use of Residuals (information retained in unaided memory)\" |\r\n| Compelled Disclosure | Important | \"May disclose if legally required, with prompt notice to other party\" |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n*This review is for informational purposes only.*\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Common NDA Red Flags\r\n\r\n1. **Overly broad definitions** — \"All information\" without exceptions\r\n2. **One-way obligations** — Only one party bound\r\n3. **Long survival** — 5+ years for non-trade-secret info\r\n4. **Hidden restrictive covenants** — Non-compete, non-solicit buried in NDA\r\n5. **No residuals clause** — Can't use general knowledge gained\r\n6. **Pre-agreed injunctive relief** — Specific performance without bond\r\n7. **Broad assignability** — Other party can assign without consent\n\nFile v1.0.0:examples/saas-agreement-review.md\n\n# SaaS Agreement Review Example\r\n\r\n## Prompt\r\n\r\n```\r\nReview this SaaS agreement. I'm the customer.\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: CloudCo Platform Subscription\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** SaaS Subscription Agreement\r\n**Your Position:** Customer\r\n**Counterparty:** CloudCo Inc.\r\n**Risk Level:** 🔴 High\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\nOne-sided vendor agreement with significant customer risk. The 3-month liability cap,\r\nmissing uptime SLA, and uncapped price increases need immediate attention.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Initial Term | 36 months | Section 8.1 |\r\n| Annual Fee | $120,000/year | Exhibit A |\r\n| Liability Cap | 3 months' fees ($30,000) | Section 9.2 |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | 30-day notice to cancel | Section 8.2 |\r\n| Uptime SLA | None specified | — |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Analysis\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**Limitation of Liability** (Section 9.2)\r\n> \"In no event shall Vendor's liability exceed the fees paid in the three (3) months preceding the claim\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** 3-month cap is unusually low; market standard is 12 months\r\n- **Risk:** For $120K/year contract, liability capped at $30K\r\n- **Redline:** Change \"three (3) months\" → \"twelve (12) months\"\r\n- **Fallback:** Accept 6 months minimum\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🔴 Critical\r\n\r\n**No Service Level Agreement**\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** No uptime commitment or service credits for outages\r\n- **Risk:** Vendor has no contractual obligation to maintain service\r\n- **Add:** SLA exhibit with 99.9% uptime and credit structure:\r\n\r\n> **Suggested SLA language:**\r\n> \"Vendor commits to 99.9% monthly uptime. For each full percentage point below 99.9%, Customer receives credit of 10% of monthly fees, up to 25%. Uptime below 95% in any month is material breach.\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Auto-Renewal Notice** (Section 8.2)\r\n> \"Agreement auto-renews unless either party provides notice 30 days prior\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** 30 days is very tight for a 36-month, $120K contract\r\n- **Redline:** Change \"30 days\" → \"90 days\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### 🟡 Important\r\n\r\n**Price Increases** (Section 4.3)\r\n> \"Vendor may adjust pricing upon any renewal with 30 days notice\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** No cap on increases; could double pricing at renewal\r\n- **Redline:** Add \"not to exceed 5% annually\" or \"CPI + 3%\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Reviewed & Acceptable\r\n\r\n| Category | Status | Notes |\r\n|----------|--------|-------|\r\n| Data Ownership | ✓ | Customer owns customer data |\r\n| Governing Law | ✓ | Delaware — standard |\r\n| IP in Configs | ✓ | Customer retains |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Missing Provisions\r\n\r\n| Provision | Priority | Why It Matters |\r\n|-----------|----------|----------------|\r\n| Data Export | Critical | No way to get data out on termination |\r\n| Security Standards | Critical | No SOC 2 or security commitments |\r\n| Subprocessor Notice | Important | No visibility into third-party data access |\r\n| Transition Assistance | Important | No help migrating away |\r\n\r\n**Suggested Data Export language:**\r\n> \"Upon termination, Vendor shall make Customer Data available for export in JSON or CSV format for 90 days at no charge.\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Internal Consistency\r\n\r\n- ⚠️ \"Services\" defined in Section 1.2 but Exhibit A references \"Platform Services\"\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n*This review is for informational purposes only.*\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Vendor-Favorable Terms to Watch\r\n\r\n1. **Liability cap tied to recent fees** — 3 months on annual contracts is very low\r\n2. **No uptime SLA** — Even 99.9% with credits is better than nothing\r\n3. **Short renewal notice** — 30 days is tight for large contracts\r\n4. **Uncapped price increases** — Always negotiate a cap\r\n5. **Broad vendor termination** — Customer should have this, not just vendor\r\n6. **One-sided indemnification** — Should be mutual\r\n7. **No data export rights** — Critical for avoiding vendor lock-in\n\nFile v1.0.0:skill-card.md\n\n## Description:\n\nReview legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents; identify unfavorable terms, suggest redlines, and compare clauses to market standards.\n\nThis skill is ready for commercial/non-commercial use.\n\n## Publisher:\n\n[youeshopent-debug](https://clawhub.ai/user/youeshopent-debug)\n\n### License/Terms of Use:\n\nMIT-0\n\n## Use Case:\n\nExternal users, employees, and developers use this skill for first-pass contract review, due diligence, and negotiation preparation. It helps surface document completeness issues, unfavorable terms, key obligations, red flags, and candidate redline language for qualified human review.\n\n### Deployment Geography for Use:\n\nGlobal\n\n## Known Risks and Mitigations:\n\nRisk: The skill can produce incorrect or overconfident contract analysis or redline suggestions.\n\nMitigation: Treat results as first-pass review only and have material terms reviewed by qualified legal counsel before relying on them.\n\nRisk: The optional legal-redline-tools workflow installs from a mutable GitHub source, which can execute code during installation.\n\nMitigation: Review or pin the external repository before use and run the workflow in a dedicated environment.\n\nRisk: The skill defaults to a US-law focus and legal enforceability varies by jurisdiction.\n\nMitigation: Confirm jurisdiction-specific issues with qualified counsel and adjust analysis for the governing law and venue in the contract.\n\n## Reference(s):\n\n- [ClawHub skill page](https://clawhub.ai/youeshopent-debug/skills/claude-legal-skill)\n- [Publisher profile](https://clawhub.ai/user/youeshopent-debug)\n- [CUAD Dataset](https://github.com/TheAtticusProject/cuad)\n- [LegalBench](https://hazyresearch.stanford.edu/legalbench/)\n- [ContractEval](https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.07389)\n- [legal-redline-tools](https://github.com/evolsb/legal-redline-tools)\n- [Agent Skills standard](https://agentskills.io)\n\n## Skill Output:\n\n**Output Type(s):** [text, markdown, guidance, configuration, shell commands]\n\n**Output Format:** [Markdown analysis with tables, prioritized risks, suggested redline language, and optional JSON redlines for downstream document tooling.]\n\n**Output Parameters:** [1D]\n\n**Other Properties Related to Output:** [Outputs are intended as first-pass legal analysis and negotiation preparation, not legal advice.]\n\n## Skill Version(s):\n\n1.0.0 (source: ClawHub release metadata; artifact frontmatter and changelog identify upstream skill content as 3.0.0)\n\n## Ethical Considerations:\n\nUsers should evaluate whether this skill is appropriate for their environment, review any generated or modified files before relying on them, and apply their organization's safety, security, and compliance requirements before deployment.","readmeExcerpt":"Skill: Claude Legal Skill Owner: youeshopent-debug Summary: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s... Tags: latest:1.0.0 Version history: v1.0.0 | 2026-04-05T19:27:54.392Z | auto Contract Review Skill v3.0.0 introduces a comprehensive framework for reviewing legal agreements, focusing on risk identif","codeSnippets":[],"executableExamples":[],"parameters":null,"dependencies":[],"permissions":[],"extractedFiles":[{"path":"skill.md","content":"---\r\nname: contract-review\r\ndescription: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market standards. Use for contract analysis, due diligence, or negotiation prep.\r\nversion: 3.0.0\r\n---\r\n\r\n# Contract Review Skill\r\n\r\nReview legal contracts for risks, extract key terms, and suggest redlines. Built on the CUAD dataset (41 risk categories), ContractEval benchmarks, and LegalBench.\r\n\r\n## When to Activate\r\n\r\n- User mentions \"review contract\", \"analyze agreement\", \"check this contract\"\r\n- User uploads or references a PDF/DOCX legal document\r\n- User asks about specific clauses, risks, or terms\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Step 1: Pre-Review Checklist\r\n\r\nBefore analyzing content, verify document completeness:\r\n\r\n- [ ] **Blank fields**: Flag any \"$X\", \"TBD\", \"[amount]\", \"____\" placeholders\r\n- [ ] **Missing exhibits**: List all referenced schedules/exhibits and note which are missing\r\n- [ ] **Signature status**: Draft or already executed?\r\n- [ ] **All pages present**: Check for truncation or missing sections\r\n\r\nIf blank fields or missing exhibits exist, flag prominently in output header.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Step 2: Identify Document Type & User Position\r\n\r\n**Ask if unclear:** \"Which party are you? (customer, vendor, buyer, seller, licensor, licensee, receiving party, disclosing party)\"\r\n\r\nThis affects what's \"risky\":\r\n- Customer reviewing vendor agreement → flag vendor-favorable terms\r\n- Vendor reviewing own template → flag customer-favorable terms\r\n- Buyer in M&A → flag seller-favorable terms\r\n- Seller in M&A → flag buyer-favorable terms\r\n- Receiving party in NDA → flag disclosing party-favorable terms\r\n\r\n**Assess power dynamic:**\r\n- Startup vs. large enterprise? (limited negotiating leverage)\r\n- Standard form vs. negotiated? (some terms non-negotiable)\r\n- Regulated industry? (some terms legally required)\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Output Format\r\n\r\nUse **markdown** for readable, scannable output. Do NOT use XML tags.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n### Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: [Document Name]\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** SaaS Subscription Agreement\r\n**Your Position:** Customer\r\n**Counterparty:** Acme Software Inc.\r\n**Risk Level:** 🟡 Medium\r\n**Document Status:** Draft / Executed on [date]\r\n\r\n## ⚠️ Pre-Signing Alerts\r\n\r\n- **Blank field:** Fee amount in Section 4.1 is \"$____\"\r\n- **Missing exhibit:** Exhibit B (SLA) referenced but not attached\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\nStandard vendor agreement with some one-sided terms. The 3-month liability cap and\r\nasymmetric termination rights need attention. Data ownership is clear.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Initial Term | 12 months | Section 8.1 |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | 12-month periods, 60-day notice | Section 8.2 |\r\n| Liability Cap | 3 months' fees | Section 10.2 |\r\n| Governing Law | Delaware | Section 12.1 |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Red Flags (Quick Scan)\r\n\r\n| Flag | Found | Location |\r\n|------|-------|-------"},{"path":"README.md","content":"# Contract Review — Agent Skill for Legal Analysis\r\n\r\n> AI-powered contract review with CUAD risk detection, market benchmarks, and lawyer-ready redlines\r\n\r\n[![GitHub stars](https://img.shields.io/github/stars/evolsb/claude-legal-skill)](https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill/stargazers)\r\n[![License: MIT](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-MIT-yellow.svg)](LICENSE)\r\n[![Agent Skills](https://img.shields.io/badge/Agent%20Skills-Compatible-blueviolet)](https://agentskills.io)\r\n[![CUAD](https://img.shields.io/badge/CUAD-41%20Categories-green)](https://github.com/TheAtticusProject/cuad)\r\n[![Version](https://img.shields.io/badge/version-3.0.0-blue)]()\r\n\r\n**Works with:** Claude Code · OpenAI Codex · Cursor · GitHub Copilot · Gemini CLI · [26+ tools](https://agentskills.io)\r\n\r\n## Quick Install\r\n\r\n```bash\r\n# Claude Code\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.claude/skills/contract-review\r\n\r\n# OpenAI Codex\r\ngit clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.codex/skills/contract-review\r\n\r\n# Other Agent Skills-compatible tools — clone to your tool's skills directory\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Try It\r\n\r\n```\r\nReview this NDA - I'm the receiving party\r\n```\r\n\r\n### Example Output\r\n\r\n![Demo output showing contract review with red flags, risk analysis, and redline suggestions](examples/demo.png)\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Why This Exists\r\n\r\nI was reviewing real contracts — NDAs, SaaS agreements, M&A docs, merchant agreements — and wanted AI assistance directly in my coding workflow. So I researched what was available:\r\n\r\n- **Commercial legal AI** (Kira, Ironclad, LegalOn, Harvey, Spellbook) — enterprise-only, custom quotes, no API access for individual developers\r\n- **Open source tools** (LexNLP, OpenContracts, LawGlance) — incomplete projects requiring significant integration work, none designed for AI coding assistants\r\n- **Generic contract checklists** — one-size-fits-all reviews that don't differentiate between an NDA and an M&A agreement, give the same advice to buyers and sellers, and say \"negotiate this\" without telling you *what to ask for*\r\n\r\nNothing worked as a drop-in skill. So I built one grounded in the [CUAD dataset](https://github.com/TheAtticusProject/cuad) (41 legal risk categories from 510 real contracts), tested it against actual agreements, and iterated until the output was useful for real negotiations.\r\n\r\nThe result: position-aware review with market benchmarks, document-type checklists, and actual redline language — not just a list of issues.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## What It Does\r\n\r\nAnalyzes legal contracts and outputs:\r\n- **Risk assessment** with severity ratings (🔴 Critical / 🟡 Important / 🟢 Acceptable)\r\n- **Red flags quick scan** — instant danger sign detection\r\n- **Key terms table** with section references\r\n- **Market standard benchmarks** — how terms compare to industry norms\r\n- **Negotiability ratings** — what's realistic to change given power dynamics\r\n- **Specific redlines** — actual replacement language, not just \"negotiate this\"\r\n- **Mi"},{"path":"_meta.json","content":"{\n  \"ownerId\": \"kn72f3rrn1s6vm4d9dv362bc3x82k7p4\",\n  \"slug\": \"claude-legal-skill\",\n  \"version\": \"1.0.0\",\n  \"publishedAt\": 1775417274392\n}"},{"path":"CHANGELOG.md","content":"# Changelog\r\n\r\n## [3.0.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- \"Why This Exists\" backstory section in README\r\n- Multi-platform support via [Agent Skills standard](https://agentskills.io) (26+ tools)\r\n- Full example outputs for NDA, SaaS, M&A, and balanced agreements\r\n- Optimized skill description for Claude Code discovery\r\n\r\n### Changed\r\n- Complete rewrite of skill.md based on real-world contract testing\r\n- Position-aware analysis now adjusts for power dynamics\r\n- Market benchmark thresholds refined from actual negotiation outcomes\r\n- Redline suggestions include fallback positions\r\n\r\n## [2.1.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- Markdown output format with severity badges\r\n- shields.io badges and GitHub topics for discoverability\r\n- Link to examples folder in README\r\n\r\n## [2.0.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- Position-aware review (customer/vendor/buyer/seller)\r\n- Complete CUAD 41-category coverage\r\n- Document-type checklists (NDA, SaaS, M&A, Payment, Finder/Broker)\r\n- Market standard benchmarks with color-coded thresholds\r\n- Negotiability ratings (High/Medium/Low)\r\n- Red flags quick scan\r\n- Jurisdiction awareness\r\n- M&A-specific support (earnouts, escrow, rep survival)\r\n\r\n### Changed\r\n- Improved redline language with specific replacement text\r\n- Better severity classification (Critical/Important/Acceptable)\r\n\r\n## [1.0.0] - 2026-01-26\r\n\r\n### Added\r\n- Initial release\r\n- Basic contract review with risk detection\r\n- Key terms extraction\r\n- CUAD dataset integration"},{"path":"examples/balanced-agreement.md","content":"# Balanced Agreement Example — Low Risk\r\n\r\nShows what a well-balanced contract looks like and how to report acceptable terms.\r\n\r\n## Prompt\r\n\r\n```\r\nI'm the customer. Review this SaaS agreement.\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Example Output\r\n\r\n```markdown\r\n# Contract Review: Acme Cloud Platform Agreement\r\n\r\n**Document Type:** SaaS Subscription Agreement\r\n**Your Position:** Customer\r\n**Counterparty:** Acme Software Inc.\r\n**Risk Level:** 🟢 Low\r\n\r\n## Executive Summary\r\n\r\nWell-balanced commercial agreement with mutual protections. Terms are within market\r\nstandards for enterprise SaaS. Minor points exist but no critical issues.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Key Terms\r\n\r\n| Term | Value | Location |\r\n|------|-------|----------|\r\n| Initial Term | 12 months | Section 8.1 |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | 12-month periods, 90-day notice | Section 8.2 |\r\n| Liability Cap | 12 months' fees | Section 10.2 |\r\n| SLA | 99.9% uptime, 10% credits | Exhibit B |\r\n| Governing Law | Delaware | Section 12.1 |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Risk Analysis\r\n\r\n### 🟢 Minor\r\n\r\n**Price Adjustments** (Section 4.5)\r\n> \"Vendor may adjust pricing upon renewal with 60 days notice, not to exceed 5% annually\"\r\n\r\n- **Issue:** Price increases capped but could compound over time\r\n- **Assessment:** 5% cap is reasonable; this is low risk\r\n- **Optional ask:** CPI-linked cap instead of flat 5%\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Reviewed & Acceptable\r\n\r\n| Category | Status | Notes |\r\n|----------|--------|-------|\r\n| Limitation of Liability | ✓ | 12-month cap — market standard |\r\n| Indemnification | ✓ | Mutual with reasonable scope |\r\n| Data Ownership | ✓ | Customer owns all customer data |\r\n| Data Export | ✓ | 90-day export period, standard formats |\r\n| Termination | ✓ | Mutual for convenience with 90 days notice |\r\n| Auto-Renewal | ✓ | 90-day notice period is adequate |\r\n| SLA | ✓ | 99.9% with meaningful credits |\r\n| Governing Law | ✓ | Delaware — neutral for commercial |\r\n| IP Rights | ✓ | Customer retains all IP in data/configs |\r\n| Confidentiality | ✓ | Mutual, 3-year term, standard exceptions |\r\n| Assignment | ✓ | Consent required, CoC exception |\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n## Missing Provisions\r\n\r\nNone critical. Agreement is comprehensive.\r\n\r\n---\r\n\r\n*This review is for informational purposes only. Material terms should be reviewed by qualified legal counsel.*\r\n```\r\n\r\n## Key Lesson\r\n\r\nNot every contract needs extensive redlines. When terms are balanced:\r\n\r\n1. **Show what's acceptable** — the \"Reviewed & Acceptable\" table builds confidence\r\n2. **Don't over-flag** — minor issues stay 🟢, not everything is 🔴\r\n3. **Provide context** — explain why terms are fine\r\n4. **Save negotiation capital** — push back only on truly problematic terms\r\n\r\n## Signs of a Balanced Agreement\r\n\r\n- Mutual obligations (indemnification, confidentiality, termination)\r\n- 12-month liability cap (market standard for SaaS)\r\n- 60-90 day notice periods\r\n- Clear data ownership and export rights\r\n- Meaningful SLA with actual remedies\r\n- Price increase caps\r\n- Neither party has dramatically more power"}],"languages":[],"docsSourceLabel":"CLAWHUB","editorialOverview":"Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s... Skill: Claude Legal Skill Owner: youeshopent-debug Summary: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market s... Tags: latest:1.0.0 Version history: v1.0.0 | 2026-04-05T19:27:54.392Z | auto Contract Review Skill v3.0.0 introduces a comprehensive framework for reviewing legal agreements, focusing on risk identif","editorialQuality":{"score":100,"threshold":65,"status":"ready","wordCount":1101,"uniquenessScore":55,"reasons":[]}},"media":{"evidence":{"source":"no-media","verified":false,"confidence":"low","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":"No screenshots, media assets, or demo links are available."},"primaryImageUrl":null,"mediaAssetCount":0,"assets":[],"demoUrl":null},"ownerResources":{"evidence":{"source":"unclaimed","verified":false,"confidence":"low","updatedAt":"2026-10-09T21:33:27.018Z","emptyReason":"This page has not been claimed by the agent owner."},"hasCustomPage":false,"customPageUpdatedAt":null,"customLinks":[],"structuredLinks":{"docsUrl":null,"demoUrl":null,"supportUrl":null,"pricingUrl":null,"statusUrl":null},"customPage":null},"relatedAgents":{"evidence":{"source":"protocol-neighbors","verified":false,"confidence":"medium","updatedAt":"2026-10-10T02:07:35.425Z","emptyReason":null},"items":[{"id":"8ebccd8e-3863-4187-8355-c3f14e1f9edf","entityType":"agent","canonicalPath":"/agent/iofficeai-aionui","slug":"iofficeai-aionui","name":"AionUi","description":"Free, local, open-source 24/7 Cowork app and OpenClaw for Gemini CLI, Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, Qwen Code, Goose CLI, Auggie, and more | 🌟 Star if you like it!","url":"https://github.com/iOfficeAI/AionUi","homepage":"https://www.aionui.com","source":"GITHUB_REPOS","protocols":["MCP","OPENCLAW"],"capabilities":[],"safetyScore":100,"overallRank":70,"updatedAt":"2026-10-09T19:11:12.944Z","createdAt":"2026-02-25T03:38:16.584Z","downloads":null},{"id":"b917f68a-ebff-438e-84f8-3f4b2494c0bc","entityType":"agent","canonicalPath":"/agent/activepieces-activepieces","slug":"activepieces-activepieces","name":"activepieces","description":"AI Agents & MCPs & AI Workflow Automation • (~400 MCP servers for AI agents) • AI Automation / AI Agent with MCPs • AI Workflows & AI Agents • MCPs for AI Agents","url":"https://github.com/activepieces/activepieces","homepage":"https://www.activepieces.com","source":"GITHUB_REPOS","protocols":["OPENCLAW"],"capabilities":[],"safetyScore":100,"overallRank":70,"updatedAt":"2026-04-15T02:22:12.426Z","createdAt":"2026-02-25T03:38:12.412Z","downloads":null},{"id":"5cb26759-3a39-483f-94cf-276a98c13bb8","entityType":"agent","canonicalPath":"/agent/cherryhq-cherry-studio","slug":"cherryhq-cherry-studio","name":"cherry-studio","description":"AI productivity studio with smart chat, autonomous agents, and 300+ assistants. Unified access to frontier LLMs","url":"https://github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio","homepage":"https://cherry-ai.com","source":"GITHUB_REPOS","protocols":["MCP","OPENCLAW"],"capabilities":[],"safetyScore":100,"overallRank":70,"updatedAt":"2026-04-11T14:38:40.986Z","createdAt":"2026-02-25T03:38:19.379Z","downloads":null},{"id":"6f6582d0-5d76-4f0f-b81d-86520247950b","entityType":"agent","canonicalPath":"/agent/copilotkit-copilotkit","slug":"copilotkit-copilotkit","name":"CopilotKit","description":"The Frontend for Agents & Generative UI. React + Angular","url":"https://github.com/CopilotKit/CopilotKit","homepage":"https://docs.copilotkit.ai","source":"GITHUB_REPOS","protocols":["OPENCLAW"],"capabilities":[],"safetyScore":100,"overallRank":70,"updatedAt":"2026-03-25T09:50:57.846Z","createdAt":"2026-02-25T03:39:14.617Z","downloads":null}],"links":{"hub":"/agent","source":"/agent/source/clawhub","protocols":[{"label":"OpenClaw","href":"/agent/protocol/openclew"}]}}}