CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

general-counsel-advisor

General Counsel advisory for startups: contract review (MSA, SaaS, NDA, DPA, employment), IP strategy, term sheet decoding, and regulatory landscape mapping. Use when reviewing any contract or term sheet, deciding when to engage outside counsel, defining IP strategy, evaluating regulatory exposure (HIPAA, GDPR, FDA, fintech), or when user mentions general counsel, GC, legal review, contract risk, term sheet, IP assignment, or regulatory exposure. NOT a substitute for licensed counsel — surfaces questions to bring to qualified attorneys.

62

Quality

78%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.gemini/skills/general-counsel-advisor/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is general-counsel-advisor in alirezarezvani/claude-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

53%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is well-organized and rich in genuinely non-obvious startup-GC domain knowledge with clearly sequenced workflows, but the skill as shipped is hollow: all five files it instructs the reader to run or consult (two scripts, three references) are missing from the bundle, and the workflows lack validation checkpoints. The SKILL.md works as an overview of a bundle that does not exist.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced bundle — add scripts/contract_risk_scanner.py, scripts/term_sheet_analyzer.py, and references/contracts_playbook.md, references/ip_and_regulatory.md, and references/term_sheet_decoder.md — or remove the references and inline the essential checklists so no instruction points at a nonexistent file.

Add validation checkpoints to the workflows (e.g., after the risk scan, confirm every HIGH finding is addressed by a counter-proposal before proceeding; in the IP audit, confirm the OSS inventory actually completed before flagging copyleft violations).

Trim the '## Keywords' section and the Version/Status/Disclaimer footer, which duplicate the frontmatter description, trigger terms, and metadata.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly dense, non-obvious domain guidance Claude does not already have ("1x non-participating is standard; 1x participating or 2x is hostile"; "5-year auto-renew with 60-day notice is a common founder mistake") with no padding explaining known concepts. Not 5 because the ~40-item "## Keywords" section and the "Version / Status / Disclaimer" footer duplicate the frontmatter description, triggers, and metadata, and the version/status footer is time-sensitive boilerplate outside any deprecated section.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete commands are specified ("python scripts/contract_risk_scanner.py path/to/contract.txt", "Run term_sheet_analyzer.py to get a 0-100 founder-friendliness score"), but neither script exists in the bundle — references/, scripts/, and assets/ are absent entirely — and the detailed checklists and glossaries are deferred to three references/*.md files that are also missing. Not 4 because missing tooling and missing referenced detail are more than minor gaps; not 2 because the body itself still supplies specific steps, negotiation standards, and a regulatory trigger table.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Four workflows are clearly numbered and sequenced ("1. Save the contract as plain text 2. Run contract_risk_scanner.py... 3. For each HIGH risk finding, draft a counter-proposal"), but no validation or verification checkpoints appear anywhere, and the batch IP Hygiene Audit ("Confirm every employee and contractor (past 12 months) signed invention assignment") has no verification step — the batch-operation cap of 3 applies. Steps also depend on scripts and "/cs:decide" / "/cs:freeze" commands not present in this bundle.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and references are clearly signaled ("See references/ip_and_regulatory.md"; a dedicated References section with one-line descriptions), but scored against the actual bundle structure, none of the five referenced files exist — both scripts and all three reference docs are absent, so every path to deeper material dead-ends like the bad "See advanced.md for more details" example. The disclosure structure is non-functional as shipped; not 3 because the failure is not mere organization but a completely empty referenced layer.

2 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

96%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A model description: explicit "what" and "when", synonym-rich natural trigger phrases, concrete named artifacts, and a scope disclaimer. The only weakness is minor overlap risk with compliance/privacy skills via the HIPAA/GDPR/FDA trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete capabilities with named artifacts — "contract review (MSA, SaaS, NDA, DPA, employment), IP strategy, term sheet decoding, and regulatory landscape mapping" — matching the comprehensive multi-action anchor like the PDF example ("Extract text and tables from PDF files, fill forms, merge documents"). Not 4 because coverage spans the skill's full scope with concrete named contract types and regimes rather than showing gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: what — "General Counsel advisory for startups: contract review (...), IP strategy, term sheet decoding, and regulatory landscape mapping"; when — "Use when reviewing any contract or term sheet... or when user mentions general counsel, GC, legal review...". This matches the 5 anchor's structure exactly, and adds a scope boundary ("NOT a substitute for licensed counsel").

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger coverage is synonym-rich and natural: "Use when reviewing any contract or term sheet, deciding when to engage outside counsel, defining IP strategy, evaluating regulatory exposure (HIPAA, GDPR, FDA, fintech), or when user mentions general counsel, GC, legal review, contract risk, term sheet, IP assignment, or regulatory exposure". Both contextual triggers and explicit keyword triggers ("GC" alongside "general counsel") are present; no file-extension terms apply to this domain, so nothing natural is missing.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche ("General Counsel advisory for startups") with distinct triggers (GC, term sheet, IP assignment, liquidation-preference vocabulary), but "evaluating regulatory exposure (HIPAA, GDPR, FDA, fintech)" overlaps with privacy/compliance/security skills that share those regime triggers — minor overlap risk with closely related skills rather than minimal. Not 5 because a user asking about GDPR or HIPAA compliance could reasonably route to either this or a privacy/CISO skill; not 3 since the dominant triggers are unmistakably legal/GC.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 3 missing

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 10 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.