Skip to content
Business
Skill

/review-contract

Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook — flag deviations, generate redlines, provide business impact analysis. Use when reviewing vendor or customer agreements, when you need clause-by-clause analysis against standard positions, or when preparing a

From plugin
knowledge-work-plugins
36k200 skills5 agents15 commands40 MCP

Claude Code

$ npx -y skills add anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill review-contract --agent claude-code

SKILL.md

review-contract.SKILL.md
name: review-contract
description: Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook — flag deviations, generate redlines, provide business impact analysis. Use when reviewing vendor or customer agreements, when you need clause-by-clause analysis against standard positions, or when preparing a negotiation strategy with prioritized redlines and fallback positions.
argument-hint: "<contract file or text>"

/review-contract -- Contract Review Against Playbook

> If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see [CONNECTORS.md](../../CONNECTORS.md).

Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook. Analyze each clause, flag deviations, generate redline suggestions, and provide business impact analysis.

**Important**: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. All analysis should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being relied upon.

Invocation

/review-contract <contract file or URL>

Review the contract: @$1

Workflow

Step 1: Accept the Contract

Accept the contract in any of these formats:

  • **File upload**: PDF, DOCX, or other document format
  • **URL**: Link to a contract in your CLM, cloud storage (e.g., Box, Egnyte, SharePoint), or other document system
  • **Pasted text**: Contract text pasted directly into the conversation

If no contract is provided, prompt the user to supply one.

Step 2: Gather Context

Ask the user for context before beginning the review:

1. **Which side are you on?** (vendor/supplier, customer/buyer, licensor, licensee, partner -- or other) 2. **Deadline**: When does this need to be finalized? (Affects prioritization of issues) 3. **Focus areas**: Any specific concerns? (e.g., "data protection is critical", "we need flexibility on term", "IP ownership is the key issue") 4. **Deal context**: Any relevant business context? (e.g., deal size, strategic importance, existing relationship)

If the user provides partial context, proceed with what you have and note assumptions.

Step 3: Load the Playbook

Look for the organization's contract review playbook in local settings (e.g., `legal.local.md` or similar configuration files).

The playbook should define:

  • **Standard positions**: The organization's preferred terms for each major clause type
  • **Acceptable ranges**: Terms that can be agreed to without escalation
  • **Escalation triggers**: Terms that require senior counsel review or outside counsel involvement

**If no playbook is configured:**

  • Inform the user that no playbook was found
  • Offer two options:

1. Help the user set up their playbook (walk through defining positions for key clauses) 2. Proceed with a generic review using widely-accepted commercial standards as the baseline

  • If proceeding generically, clearly note that the review is based on general commercial standards, not the organization's specific positions

Step 4: Clause-by-Clause Analysis

Apply the following review process:

1. **Identify the contract type**: SaaS agreement, professional services, license, partnership, procurement, etc. The contract type affects which clauses are most material. 2. **Determine the user's side**: Vendor, customer, licensor, licensee, partner. This fundamentally changes the analysis (e.g., limitation of liability protections favor different parties). 3. **Read the entire contract** before flagging issues. Clauses interact with each other (e.g., an uncapped indemnity may be partially mitigated by a broad limitation of liability). 4. **Analyze each material clause** against the playbook position. 5. **Consider the contract holistically**: Are the overall risk allocation and commercial terms balanced?

Analyze the contract systematically, covering at minimum:

| Clause Category | Key Review Points | |----------------|-------------------| | **Limitation of Liability** | Cap amount, carveouts, mutual vs. unilateral, consequential damages | | **Indemnification** | Scope, mutual vs. unilateral, cap, IP infringement, data breach | | **IP Ownership** | Pre-existing IP, developed IP, work-for-hire, license grants, assignment | | **Data Protection** | DPA requirement, processing terms, sub-processors, breach notification, cross-border transfers | | **Confidentiality** | Scope, term, carveouts, return/destruction obligations | | **Representations & Warranties** | Scope, disclaimers, survival period | | **Term & Termination** | Duration, renewal, termination for convenience, termination for cause, wind-down | | **Governing Law & Dispute Resolution** | Jurisdiction, venue, arbitration vs. litigation | | **Insurance** | Coverage requirements, minimums, evidence of coverage | | **Assignment** | Consent requirements, change of control, exceptions | | **Force Majeure** | Scope, notification, termination rights | | **Payment Terms** | Net terms, late fees, taxes, price escalation |

For each clause, assess against the playbook (or generic standards) and note whether it is present, absent, or unusual.

Detailed Clause Guidance

Limitation of Liability

**Key elements to review:**

  • Cap amount (fixed dollar amount, multiple of fees, or uncapped)
  • Whether the cap is mutual or applies differently to each party
  • Carveouts from the cap (what liabilities are uncapped)
  • Whether consequential, indirect, special, or punitive damages are excluded
  • Whether the exclusion is mutual
  • Carveouts from the consequential damages exclusion
  • Whether the cap applies per-claim, per-year, or aggregate

**Common issues:**

  • Cap set at a fraction of fees paid (e.g., "fees paid in the prior 3 months" on a low-value contract)
  • Asymmetric carveouts favoring the drafter
  • Broad carveouts that effectively eliminate the cap (e.g., "any breach of Section X" where Section X covers most obligations)
  • No consequential damages exclusion for one party's breaches

Indemnification

**Key elements to review:**

  • Whether indemnification is mutual or un
Read more
@anthropics-2
Ships withknowledge-work-plugins

Plugins that turn Claude into a specialist for your role, team, and company. Built for Claude Cowork, also compatible with Claude Code.

36k200 skills5 agents40 MCP
Get the whole plugin

Stars on GitHub

Momentum

stars in total
35.7k
Star history of anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins on GitHub, a chart by star-history.com

Other skills on knowledge-work-plugins.

More skills from other plugins.

opc-asset-ops

opc-asset-ops

Turn repeatable outputs of a one-person company into compounding assets. Use when Codex needs to explain asset-compounding…

@easychen@easychenInstall Skill
dbs

dbs

dontbesilent 商业工具箱的技能调度台,根据当前问题和反馈选择下一步,在对话中直接执行、澄清、组合或对照尝试 Skill。用户不知道从哪里开始、需要调整处理方法、第一次使用…

dbs5d11k
@dontbesilent2025@dontbesilent2025Install Skill
money

money

Main entry point for the Show Me The Money business automation suite. Dual mode: pre-task routing (which skill fits your problem)…

@iamzifei@iamzifeiInstall Skill

Questions about review-contract.

Which coding agents can use review-contract?
review-contract installs in Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, OpenCode and Windsurf with the skills CLI, using each agent's flag shown on this page. Flowy's auto-invocation, which fires a skill when your prompt matches, runs in Claude Code only.