Orchestrates multi-agent contract review for risk analysis, plain-English summary, missing protections, compliance check, safety score, and executive report. Trigger via /contract-review.
npx claudepluginhub jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skillsThis skill is limited to using the following tools:
Flagship contract review skill that spawns five parallel analysis agents, then
Analyzes contracts by extracting key terms, identifying risks, scoring clauses using NLP approaches. Grounds analysis in references/patterns.md, sharp_edges.md, validations.md for creation, diagnosis, review.
Reviews legal documents including contracts, ToS, privacy policies, NDAs, and corporate docs section-by-section. Identifies risks, gaps, unfavorable terms, and provides replacement text.
Analyzes contracts for unfavorable clauses in liability, termination, IP, payment, and more; generates prioritized counter-proposals with market-standard replacements. Use for pre-signing reviews or negotiations.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Flagship contract review skill that spawns five parallel analysis agents, then aggregates their findings into a single executive report with a Contract Safety Score. Designed for founders, freelancers, and small-business operators who need to understand what they are signing without retaining outside counsel for every agreement.
Most contracts arrive as walls of dense legalese. A single-pass review misses nuance. This skill mirrors how a law firm reviews contracts: multiple specialists work in parallel, each with a different lens, then a senior partner synthesizes everything into a recommendation.
The orchestrator:
Ingest the contract.
Classify the contract. Determine the contract type from one of the following categories:
Extract metadata. Capture: parties, effective date, term/duration, governing law, dispute resolution mechanism, total contract value (if stated).
Launch five parallel agents using the Task tool. Each agent receives the full contract text and returns structured findings.
| Agent | Focus | Key Deliverable |
|---|---|---|
| Risk Analyst | Clause-by-clause risk scoring across 10 categories | Risk heat map, poison pill flags |
| Plain-English Translator | 8th-grade reading level rewrite | Clause-by-clause translation with flags |
| Protection Auditor | Gap analysis against type-specific checklists | Missing protections with urgency ratings |
| Compliance Checker | Regulatory alignment (GDPR, CCPA, labor law basics) | Compliance findings table |
| Party-Balance Analyst | Fairness tilt between the parties | Asymmetry flags, one-sided clause list |
Aggregate results. Combine all five agent reports into a unified document with these sections:
Compute the Contract Safety Score. Weighted formula:
| Component | Weight | Source Agent |
|---|---|---|
| Risk severity (inverse) | 30% | Risk Analyst |
| Protection coverage | 25% | Protection Auditor |
| Party balance | 20% | Party-Balance Analyst |
| Compliance alignment | 15% | Compliance Checker |
| Language clarity | 10% | Plain-English Translator |
Letter grades: A (90-100), B (80-89), C (70-79), D (60-69), F (< 60).
Present the final report in the conversation and note the output filename.
Filename: CONTRACT-REVIEW-{party-or-title}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md
The report uses Markdown with tables and follows this structure:
# Contract Review Report
## Executive Summary
## Contract Metadata
## Contract Safety Score: [score]/100 ([grade])
## Risk Heat Map
## Plain-English Quick Reference
## Missing Protections
## Compliance Findings
## Party-Balance Assessment
## Recommended Next Steps
## Disclaimer
| Failure Mode | Cause | Resolution |
|---|---|---|
| File not found | Path is incorrect or file missing | Ask the user to confirm the file path |
| Unreadable format | Binary or encrypted document | Ask for a plain-text or PDF version |
| Document too long | Exceeds context window | Summarize by section; warn about truncation |
| Agent timeout | One parallel agent fails to return | Report partial results; note which agent failed |
| Ambiguous contract type | Cannot classify confidently | Ask the user to confirm the contract type |
Example 1 — File-based review:
User: Review the contract at
~/contracts/acme-msa-2026.pdf
The orchestrator reads the file, classifies it as a Master Services Agreement, launches five agents, and produces a report:
Contract Safety Score: 72/100 (C)
Top Risk: Unlimited indemnification liability (Section 8.2)
Missing: No force majeure clause, no data breach notification timeline
Balance: Tilts 65/35 in favor of Acme Corp
Recommendation: Negotiate Sections 8.2 and 12.1 before signing
Example 2 — Pasted text:
User: Review this contract: [pasted NDA text]
The orchestrator classifies it as a Mutual NDA, flags a unilateral non-solicitation clause hidden in the definitions, and scores it 58/100 (F).
Legal Disclaimer: This skill provides AI-generated analysis for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, create an attorney-client relationship, or substitute for consultation with a qualified attorney. Contract interpretation depends on jurisdiction, context, and specific facts that an AI cannot fully evaluate. Always consult a licensed attorney before making legal decisions based on this analysis.