Content
60%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
A well-structured, largely actionable body with concrete commands, useful clause defaults, and a strong regulatory trigger table. Its two real weaknesses are that every referenced bundle file is missing from the bundle (breaking both progressive disclosure and the runnable Quick Start), and avoidable token spend on a redundant Keywords section and textbook legal explanations.
Suggestions
Bundle the cited files: add scripts/contract_risk_scanner.py, scripts/term_sheet_analyzer.py, and the three references/*.md files (contracts_playbook.md, ip_and_regulatory.md, term_sheet_decoder.md) — or remove the citations — since every script command and reference link currently dead-ends.
Delete the Keywords section: the ~40 trigger terms already live in the frontmatter description, so the body copy adds tokens without runtime value.
Add feedback loops to the workflows, e.g., re-run contract_risk_scanner.py on the redlined contract to confirm HIGH findings are resolved before sending to outside counsel.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient — the regulatory trigger table and clause defaults ('1x non-participating is standard; 1x participating or 2x is hostile') earn their tokens — but the ~40-term Keywords section duplicates the frontmatter description's triggers, and lines like 'Copyright — automatic on creation, but register for statutory damages eligibility' restate standard legal knowledge Claude already has. | 3 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, mostly executable guidance: copy-paste commands ('python scripts/contract_risk_scanner.py path/to/contract.txt'), specific thresholds ('negotiate the worst 3 clauses', liability cap of '12 months of fees'), and a defined output template. Minor gaps: the term-sheet input schema is deferred to '--help' and '/cs:decide' / '/cs:gc-review' are defined in other skills. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | Four workflows with clearly sequenced numbered steps and some checkpoints (scanner HIGH-risk findings drive counter-proposals; 'Always have a securities/venture attorney review before signing'). Falls short of anchor 5 because there is no validate-fix-retry feedback loop — e.g., the scanner is never re-run on the redlined contract to confirm the HIGH findings are resolved. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are well-signaled and one level deep ('See references/ip_and_regulatory.md', a References section with linked, annotated files), but none of the referenced files exist — the bundle contains no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories. Every 'See references/...' link and both Quick Start scripts (contract_risk_scanner.py, term_sheet_analyzer.py) dead-end, so navigation to the detailed material is impossible despite the good structural design. | 2 / 5 |
Total | 13 / 20 Passed |