review-contract
Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook — flag deviations, generate redlines, provide business impact analysis. Use when reviewing vendor or customer agreements, when you need clause-by-clause analysis against standard positions, or when preparing a negotiation strategy with prioritized redlines and fallback positions.
What this skill does
# /review-contract -- Contract Review Against Playbook > If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see [CONNECTORS.md](../../CONNECTORS.md). Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook. Analyze each clause, flag deviations, generate redline suggestions, and provide business impact analysis. **Important**: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. All analysis should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being relied upon. ## Invocation ``` /review-contract <contract file or URL> ``` Review the contract: @$1 ## Workflow ### Step 1: Accept the Contract Accept the contract in any of these formats: - **File upload**: PDF, DOCX, or other document format - **URL**: Link to a contract in your CLM, cloud storage (e.g., Box, Egnyte, SharePoint), or other document system - **Pasted text**: Contract text pasted directly into the conversation If no contract is provided, prompt the user to supply one. ### Step 2: Gather Context Ask the user for context before beginning the review: 1. **Which side are you on?** (vendor/supplier, customer/buyer, licensor, licensee, partner -- or other) 2. **Deadline**: When does this need to be finalized? (Affects prioritization of issues) 3. **Focus areas**: Any specific concerns? (e.g., "data protection is critical", "we need flexibility on term", "IP ownership is the key issue") 4. **Deal context**: Any relevant business context? (e.g., deal size, strategic importance, existing relationship) If the user provides partial context, proceed with what you have and note assumptions. ### Step 3: Load the Playbook Look for the organization's contract review playbook in local settings (e.g., `legal.local.md` or similar configuration files). The playbook should define: - **Standard positions**: The organization's preferred terms for each major clause type - **Acceptable ranges**: Terms that can be agreed to without escalation - **Escalation triggers**: Terms that require senior counsel review or outside counsel involvement **If no playbook is configured:** - Inform the user that no playbook was found - Offer two options: 1. Help the user set up their playbook (walk through defining positions for key clauses) 2. Proceed with a generic review using widely-accepted commercial standards as the baseline - If proceeding generically, clearly note that the review is based on general commercial standards, not the organization's specific positions ### Step 4: Clause-by-Clause Analysis Apply the following review process: 1. **Identify the contract type**: SaaS agreement, professional services, license, partnership, procurement, etc. The contract type affects which clauses are most material. 2. **Determine the user's side**: Vendor, customer, licensor, licensee, partner. This fundamentally changes the analysis (e.g., limitation of liability protections favor different parties). 3. **Read the entire contract** before flagging issues. Clauses interact with each other (e.g., an uncapped indemnity may be partially mitigated by a broad limitation of liability). 4. **Analyze each material clause** against the playbook position. 5. **Consider the contract holistically**: Are the overall risk allocation and commercial terms balanced? Analyze the contract systematically, covering at minimum: | Clause Category | Key Review Points | |----------------|-------------------| | **Limitation of Liability** | Cap amount, carveouts, mutual vs. unilateral, consequential damages | | **Indemnification** | Scope, mutual vs. unilateral, cap, IP infringement, data breach | | **IP Ownership** | Pre-existing IP, developed IP, work-for-hire, license grants, assignment | | **Data Protection** | DPA requirement, processing terms, sub-processors, breach notification, cross-border transfers | | **Confidentiality** | Scope, term, carveouts, return/destruction obligations | | **Representations & Warranties** | Scope, disclaimers, survival period | | **Term & Termination** | Duration, renewal, termination for convenience, termination for cause, wind-down | | **Governing Law & Dispute Resolution** | Jurisdiction, venue, arbitration vs. litigation | | **Insurance** | Coverage requirements, minimums, evidence of coverage | | **Assignment** | Consent requirements, change of control, exceptions | | **Force Majeure** | Scope, notification, termination rights | | **Payment Terms** | Net terms, late fees, taxes, price escalation | For each clause, assess against the playbook (or generic standards) and note whether it is present, absent, or unusual. #### Detailed Clause Guidance ##### Limitation of Liability **Key elements to review:** - Cap amount (fixed dollar amount, multiple of fees, or uncapped) - Whether the cap is mutual or applies differently to each party - Carveouts from the cap (what liabilities are uncapped) - Whether consequential, indirect, special, or punitive damages are excluded - Whether the exclusion is mutual - Carveouts from the consequential damages exclusion - Whether the cap applies per-claim, per-year, or aggregate **Common issues:** - Cap set at a fraction of fees paid (e.g., "fees paid in the prior 3 months" on a low-value contract) - Asymmetric carveouts favoring the drafter - Broad carveouts that effectively eliminate the cap (e.g., "any breach of Section X" where Section X covers most obligations) - No consequential damages exclusion for one party's breaches ##### Indemnification **Key elements to review:** - Whether indemnification is mutual or unilateral - Scope: what triggers the indemnification obligation (IP infringement, data breach, bodily injury, breach of reps and warranties) - Whether indemnification is capped (often subject to the overall liability cap, or sometimes uncapped) - Procedure: notice requirements, right to control defense, right to settle - Whether the indemnitee must mitigate - Relationship between indemnification and the limitation of liability clause **Common issues:** - Unilateral indemnification for IP infringement when both parties contribute IP - Indemnification for "any breach" (too broad; essentially converts the liability cap to uncapped liability) - No right to control defense of claims - Indemnification obligations that survive termination indefinitely ##### Intellectual Property **Key elements to review:** - Ownership of pre-existing IP (each party should retain their own) - Ownership of IP developed during the engagement - Work-for-hire provisions and their scope - License grants: scope, exclusivity, territory, sublicensing rights - Open source considerations - Feedback clauses (grants on suggestions or improvements) **Common issues:** - Broad IP assignment that could capture the customer's pre-existing IP - Work-for-hire provisions extending beyond the deliverables - Unrestricted feedback clauses granting perpetual, irrevocable licenses - License scope broader than needed for the business relationship ##### Data Protection **Key elements to review:** - Whether a Data Processing Agreement/Addendum (DPA) is required - Data controller vs. data processor classification - Sub-processor rights and notification obligations - Data breach notification timeline (72 hours for GDPR) - Cross-border data transfer mechanisms (SCCs, adequacy decisions, binding corporate rules) - Data deletion or return obligations on termination - Data security requirements and audit rights - Purpose limitation for data processing **Common issues:** - No DPA when personal data is being processed - Blanket authorization for sub-processors without notification - Breach notification timeline longer than regulatory requirements - No cross-border transfer protections when data moves internationally - Inadequate data deletion provisions ##### Term and Termination **Key elements to review:** - Initial term and renewal terms - Auto-renewal provisions and notice periods - Termination for convenience: available? notice period? e
Related in Code Review
gstack
IncludedFast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)
startup-due-diligence
IncludedLegal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.
interview-master
IncludedThis skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.
fix-issue
IncludedFixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.
sf-apex
IncludedGenerates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.
swift-development
IncludedComprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.