Legal Compliance Auditor

Scan a project's existing legal documents and audit them for compliance gaps, outdated clauses, missing disclosures, and cross-document consistency. Findings are displayed inline in the conversation.

Phase 0: Discovery

Scan the project for existing legal documents. Search common locations:

• docs/legal/
• legal/
• pages/legal/
• Root directory files matching: terms*, privacy*, cookie*, gdpr*, disclaimer*, acceptable-use*, dpa*

Use the Glob tool with patterns like **/legal/**/*.md, **/privacy*, **/terms*.

Present the discovered documents and use the AskUserQuestion tool to confirm scope:

"Found N legal documents. Audit all of them, or select specific files?"

If no legal documents are found, report: "No legal documents found in this project. Use /legal-generate to create them."

Phase 1: Context

Use the AskUserQuestion tool to ask which jurisdictions to audit against:

• US
• EU/GDPR
• UK
• Multiple (specify)

Read each document in the confirmed scope.

Phase 2: Audit

Invoke the legal-compliance-auditor agent via the Task tool with all documents and jurisdiction context.

If the user's input includes the word benchmark (either via args parameter or natural language), append the benchmark trigger to the Task prompt. Otherwise, send the standard audit prompt unchanged.

Standard audit prompt:

Task legal-compliance-auditor: "Audit the following legal documents for [jurisdiction] compliance.

Documents:
[Include full content of each document]

Check each document individually for compliance gaps, then cross-reference all documents for consistency."

Benchmark audit prompt (append to the standard prompt above):

"Additionally, run benchmark mode: check against the GDPR Art 13/14 regulatory disclosure checklist and compare against peer SaaS policies."

Phase 3: Report

<critical_sequence>

Display all findings inline in the conversation. NEVER write audit findings to files -- this is a hard requirement for open-source repositories.

</critical_sequence>

After displaying findings, use the AskUserQuestion tool:

• Fix Critical/High -- Generate fix suggestions for the most severe findings
• Done -- End the audit

If "Fix Critical/High" is selected, present specific text changes the user can apply to address each Critical and High finding. The user applies fixes manually.

Important Guidelines

• Audit findings are conversation-only -- never persist to files in the repository
• Cross-document consistency checks only run when 2+ documents are in scope
• If a document references another document type that does not exist in the project, flag it as a CRITICAL finding
• Do not modify the audited documents -- only report findings and suggest fixes