local-counsel-manager
End-to-end external local counsel lifecycle management for multi-jurisdiction legal matters. LC selection criteria and capability assessment, engagement setup and instruction design, performance monitoring and check-in cadence, scope enforcement, and relationship escalation. Use when selecting local counsel for a jurisdiction, designing LC instructions, managing the LC check-in rhythm, enforcing scope boundaries when LC signals overreach, or escalating a performance or relationship issue beyond the matter team. Trigger on: 'which LC should we use', 'LC instruction', 'brief the local counsel', 'LC hasn't responded', 'LC is going off scope', 'LC scope dispute', 'confirm scope with LC', 'LC check-in', 'LC is slow', 'monitor the LC network', 'LC engagement letter', 'LC selection', 'what should we tell the local counsel', 'LC onboarding', 'LC performance issue', 'LC relationship problem'.
82
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/local-counsel-manager/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an excellent skill description that thoroughly covers a well-defined niche. It provides specific concrete actions across the full local counsel lifecycle, includes comprehensive and natural trigger terms, and clearly delineates both what the skill does and when it should be used. The description is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with other legal or project management skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: LC selection criteria and capability assessment, engagement setup and instruction design, performance monitoring and check-in cadence, scope enforcement, and relationship escalation. These are clearly defined lifecycle stages. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (end-to-end LC lifecycle management with specific capabilities listed) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause with five distinct scenarios, plus a comprehensive 'Trigger on' list). Both dimensions are thoroughly addressed. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say, including variations like 'which LC should we use', 'LC hasn't responded', 'LC is going off scope', 'LC check-in', 'LC engagement letter', 'LC onboarding', and 'LC performance issue'. These reflect realistic user language in a legal operations context. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche focused specifically on external local counsel management in multi-jurisdiction legal matters. The 'LC' terminology and specific lifecycle stages (scope enforcement, engagement letters, check-in cadence) make it very unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
55%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill is highly actionable with excellent workflow clarity — concrete templates, day-numbered escalation paths, signal-detection phrases, and clear validation gates make it immediately executable. However, it is severely over-length, embedding extensive domain commentary, rationale explanations, and detailed templates that should be split into referenced files. The monolithic structure means every invocation loads ~400+ lines of context regardless of which mode is needed, wasting significant token budget.
Suggestions
Split the document templates (Mode 2 instruction letter skeleton, Mode 4 scope response skeleton) into separate referenced files (e.g., LC_INSTRUCTION_TEMPLATE.md, SCOPE_RESPONSE_TEMPLATE.md) and link from the main skill.
Move the 'Domain Knowledge — LC Network Management' section and 'M365 Connected Mode' section into separate referenced files — these are supplementary context, not core workflow instructions.
Remove explanatory rationale paragraphs that justify why the skill exists (e.g., 'The most common failure modes on LC networks are not capability failures — they are instruction failures') — Claude doesn't need persuading, it needs instructions.
Consolidate the input classification section and Mode 4 signal detection — they duplicate the same phrase list and logic, adding ~30 lines of redundancy.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | This skill is extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. It repeatedly explains coordination principles, failure modes, and LPM vs attorney distinctions that Claude can infer. Phrases like 'Managing local counsel is a coordination discipline, not a legal one' and extensive explanations of why instruction letters matter are unnecessary padding. The domain knowledge section restates concepts already embedded in the modes. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides fully structured, copy-paste-ready document templates (instruction letter, scope response letter), concrete escalation timelines with day-numbered actions, specific signal-detection phrases, and action tables with owners and deadlines. Every mode produces a concrete, executable output. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step processes are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: the input classification runs before mode selection, the identifier gate must be confirmed before documents, the escalation path has day-numbered stages with clear owners, and instruction amendments require written acknowledgment. Feedback loops are present (e.g., 'If errors: fix and re-validate' equivalent in scope enforcement, Day 5 internal flag, Day 7 reassessment). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. The instruction letter template, scope response template, domain knowledge, M365 integration details, and cross-skill handoffs are all inline. The domain knowledge section, M365 connected mode, and detailed templates could easily be split into separate referenced files to reduce the main skill's token footprint. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- legalopsconsulting/lpm-skills
- Commit
8f9093f
- 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.