/demand-intake

name: demand-intake
description: Pre-drafting context gathering for a demand letter — parties, facts, basis, leverage, BATNA, and privilege filters — written to a structured intake.md the demand-draft skill reads. Use when the user wants to prep a demand letter, run intake before drafting, or capture context for a payment demand, breach/cure notice, cease-and-desist, employment separation, or preservation demand.
argument-hint: "[title] [--full]"

/demand-intake

1. Load `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` → demand-letter practice, landscape, risk calibration. 2. Follow the workflow and reference below. 3. Run the adaptive intake (core 8 always; strategic block if material or `--full`). 4. Generate slug from title + counterparty + year-month. 5. Write `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/demand-letters/[slug]/intake.md`. 6. Confirm with user: "Intake saved. Run `/litigation-legal:demand-draft [slug]` when ready."

---

Demand Intake

Purpose

The drafting is downstream. The value is in the pre-writing — forcing the questions a careless letter skips. Leverage, BATNA, downside tolerance, privilege filters, the actual audience. A demand letter sent without thinking about those is worse than no letter.

Load context

• `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` → Demand-letter practice (insurance-tender timing, materiality threshold for matter creation, any seed-doc templates), landscape (counterparty type, repeat-adversary patterns), risk calibration (to pre-estimate materiality), house style. **Tone, compliance period, marking, signer are NOT practice-level defaults — they are set per matter in the `## Posture for this matter` step below.**

Flags

• `--full` → run the complete intake regardless of materiality heuristics (for counsel who wants thorough every time)

The intake

Posture for this matter (ask FIRST, before the core)

> **Posture for this matter.** Demand-letter tone and terms are case-by-case, not a practice default. Ask: > - **Tone:** measured / assertive / aggressive? (depends on the relationship, the amount, and whether litigation is likely) > - **Response window:** what's reasonable given the claim? (14 days is common for payment demands; 30 days for cure; 7 days for cease-and-desist — but the contract or protocol may set it) > - **Marking:** does this need a "without prejudice" or "without prejudice save as to costs" marking? (settlement communications do; assertions of claim often don't; jurisdiction matters — ask if unsure) > - **Signer:** you, the client, the GC, instructed solicitor/counsel? > Don't assume. Read the prior demand correspondence in the matter file if there is any — it establishes the register.

Record the answers in the intake under a `## Posture` section before `## Parties`. These answers govern the rest of the intake and the downstream draft — do not fall back to a practice-level default if the user left any of them blank; ask again.

Core — always asked (8 questions)

**1. Demand type** `payment | breach-cure | cease-desist | employment-separation | preservation | other`

**2. Parties**

• **Sender:** our company (and any specific entity if multi-entity)
• **Recipient:** counterparty — name, entity, address
• **Recipient audience:** who actually reads (GC? CEO? individual? in-house legal?)
• **Relationship:** `customer | vendor | ex-employee | competitor | third-party | other`

**3. Triggering event**

• What happened and when (dates matter — statute-of-limitations, notice periods)
• Evidence available (contracts, emails, records, witnesses)

*Seed doc opportunity: "If you can share the underlying contract, correspondence, or evidence, the draft will be materially sharper. Paths work."*

**4. Legal / contractual basis**

• Which provisions — specific contract sections if applicable
• Governing law (jurisdiction, choice-of-law clause)
• Statutes or rules relied on (placeholders OK — the draft will flag `[CITE:___]` anyway)

**5. Desired outcome**

• Specific asks. Not "resolution" — payment of $X by date Y; cessation of specific activity Z; cure within N days; return of specific property.
• If multiple asks, order them (primary vs. fallback)

**6. Deadlines**

• External deadline driving this (SoL, ongoing harm window, business event)
• Demand compliance deadline — how long we give the recipient. Use the response window captured in `## Posture for this matter` above; do not fall back to a practice-level default.

**7. Prior outreach**

• Has this been raised informally? When, by whom, in what form?
• Any response so far?
• Why is escalation to a demand letter happening now?

**8. Distribution**

• Delivery method (ask; no practice-level default)
• Signer — captured in `## Posture for this matter` above
• Copies — internal stakeholders, insurance carrier (if tendering pre-demand per practice-level tender-timing rule), counsel

Strategic — asked if material, or if `--full`

Materiality heuristic: ask the strategic block if any of the following are true.

• Demand type is `cease-desist`, `breach-cure`, `employment-separation`, or `preservation`
• Desired outcome dollar value ≥ the medium-severity band from `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` risk calibration
• Counterparty is a customer, competitor, or frequent adversary per `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md` landscape
• User ran with `--full`

**Explicit skip option.** When the strategic block is triggered, the user can decline to answer it. Ask plainly:

> This is a material demand by the heuristic. The strategic block (leverage, BATNA, tone, privilege filters) is where most of the pre-writing value lives. Skipping it produces a thinner draft. > - **Answer now** — walk the strategic block (5-7 min) > - **Answer partial** — walk the subset you feel prepared for > - **Skip** — proceed to draft with only the core block; I'