ip-clause-review

Review the IP clauses in an agreement — assignment, ownership, license grants, warranties, indemnities. Use when reviewing IP terms in employment, consulting, SOW, vendor, or licensing agreements, when asked to check the assignment language or license scope, or when an agreement with IP provisions is pasted or attached.

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Quality

Content

84%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The skill body delivers a well-sequenced, actionable IP-review workflow with templates, severity calibration, and verification checkpoints. The main weakness is moderate verbosity — some jurisdictional background restates concepts Claude already knows.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is thorough and mostly earns its tokens, but some sections restate context Claude already knows (general explanations of moral rights, work-for-hire doctrine) and the memo template plus preamble could be tightened.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete, copy-ready artifacts: a structured memo template, per-clause output blocks with severity calibration, and specific redline-language examples the lawyer can use directly.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear six-step sequence (Orient → assignment gap → clause-by-clause → cross-clause → jurisdiction → assemble) with explicit validation checkpoints, a pre-delivery quality checklist, and decision-posture guardrails.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The single SKILL.md is a self-contained overview with no bundle files; sections are well-organized and one-level references point only to the external practice-profile CLAUDE.md, so navigation is clear.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The description is specific, well-triggered, and complete, naming concrete IP clause categories and explicit use conditions tied to real agreement types. It is clearly distinguishable from broader contract-review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists concrete actions across multiple IP clause categories — 'assignment, ownership, license grants, warranties, indemnities' — naming specific review activities rather than abstract capability.	3 / 3
Completeness	States what it does ('Review the IP clauses') and gives explicit 'Use when...' triggers covering multiple agreement types and paste/attach scenarios.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Covers natural user phrasings — 'IP clauses', 'assignment language', 'license scope', 'employment, consulting, SOW, vendor, or licensing agreements' — terms a lawyer would actually say.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Narrowly scoped to IP-clause review with distinct triggers tied to specific agreement types, unlikely to conflict with general contract-review skills.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: anthropics/claude-for-legal
Path: ip-legal/skills/ip-clause-review/SKILL.md
Commit: 4a6c651

Reviewed: 6 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.