Contract Review skill
A contract review skill: red flags, key terms, comparison with market practice and ready redline wording that accounts for your side of the deal
- 478 ★ on the repository
- Last commit
- MIT
Minimal access
Why this level
- The skill consists of instructions and runs nothing, but the contracts you analyze may hold confidential data that reaches your agent
Install
- Works in
Manual install
git clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.claude/skills/contract-reviewInstalls into Claude Code personal skills. Then ask for a contract review and name your side.
Access and checks
How we reviewMinimal accessThe tool runs nothing and makes no network calls.
- The skill consists of instructions and runs nothing, but the contracts you analyze may hold confidential data that reaches your agent
This is third-party code. Review the repository files before installing.
What it does
Contract Review analyzes NDAs, SaaS agreements, M&A contracts, payment and broker agreements and tells you which terms disadvantage your side. Before the analysis the skill checks the document for completeness: blank fields such as TBD and "____", missing exhibits, signature status and truncated pages. It then works out the contract type and your role (customer, vendor, buyer, seller, receiving party), and that decides what counts as a problem term. The output gives severity ratings by color, a quick list of red flags, a key terms table with section references, a comparison with market thresholds (for instance, a 12-month liability cap is standard and under 6 months is a warning) and a rating of what is realistically negotiable. For each problem the skill proposes ready replacement wording and text for missing provisions, and it also checks internal cross-references and undefined terms. The foundation is the CUAD dataset with 41 legal risk categories from 510 real contracts. Each contract type has its own checklist, and findings account for jurisdiction: in California, for example, non-competes are void. The result can be turned into Word documents with tracked changes through the separate legal-redline-tools.
Who it is for. For founders, managers and developers with no lawyer at hand who need a fast first read of a contract before turning to a specialist.
Good fit when
- You received an NDA and need to see which terms are bad for the receiving party in particular
- A SaaS agreement is about to be signed: liability cap, auto-renewal, suspension rights and data export
- Before an M&A deal you need to go through the earnout, escrow and rep survival periods
- You want concrete replacement wording for negotiations, with no generic advice to discuss a clause
- You need a quick check that the contract has no blank fields or missing exhibits
Not a fit when
- You need legal advice: the author states it is not legal advice and material terms should go to a qualified lawyer
- The contract is governed by Russian law: the skill focuses on the US, rules differ in other jurisdictions, and the catalog has separate legal skills for Russian contracts
- The document is very long: you may have to review it section by section because of the context window
- You need a final decision on a deal: on the ContractEval benchmark clause extraction scores about 0.62 F1, enough for a first pass
Example request
Review this NDA - I'm the receiving partyLimitations
The author stresses three limits. It is not legal advice: material terms need to go to a qualified lawyer. The analysis defaults to US law, and rules differ in other jurisdictions. Very long contracts may need a section-by-section review because of the context window. On the ContractEval benchmark Claude scores about 0.62 F1 on clause extraction, so the result suits a first pass and flagging issues, while large deals still need a lawyer. Word and PDF redline documents need the separate legal-redline-tools package, and you hand the contracts to the model, so their contents reach your agent.
How to disable. Delete the ~/.claude/skills/contract-review folder (~/.codex/skills/contract-review for Codex).
FAQ
How do I install the contract review skill in Claude Code?
Run git clone https://github.com/evolsb/claude-legal-skill ~/.claude/skills/contract-review. For Codex the path is ~/.codex/skills/contract-review, and for other tools on the Agent Skills format clone into their skills directory. Then write something like: "Review this NDA - I'm the receiving party".
Why does the skill ask which party I am?
Your role changes the assessment. A customer reviewing a vendor contract looks for vendor-favorable terms, and a vendor with its own template looks for customer-favorable ones. In M&A the buyer and seller read opposite provisions, and in an NDA the receiving and disclosing parties read terms differently.
Which contract types does it know?
There are separate checklists for NDAs, SaaS and MSAs, payment and merchant agreements, M&A and finder or broker agreements. For an NDA that means confidentiality term, non-solicitation and a destruction certificate; for SaaS, SLA, data export, suspension rights and price caps.
Can it produce Word redlines?
The skill itself outputs structured redlines in JSON. To get a Word document with tracked changes, a PDF and a memo, install the separate legal-redline-tools with pip install git+https://github.com/evolsb/legal-redline-tools.git and run it on the redlines file.
Does it fit contracts under Russian law?
The analysis defaults to US law, and rules differ between jurisdictions. The skill flags jurisdiction issues, for example that non-competes are void in California. For Russian documents pick a skill written for Russian law.
Discussion
No questions or reviews yet.
Related
SkillsRussian supply contract review skill
Russian Legal Skills для Claude
A Claude Skill that reviews a Russian supply contract under Civil Code chapter 30: essential terms, deadlines, price and liability
A first-pass contract review skill under Russian law: Civil Code, 152-FZ, Roskomnadzor, personal data
Clarity: skills for legal writing
Damascus Ink
Marketplace of three skills for lawyers that check the grammar, logic and persuasiveness of legal texts under Russian practice
A set of Claude Code skills: contract review, risk scoring, NDA and policy generation, compliance checks and PDF reports
Anthropic's legal plugin suite: contracts, privacy, employment, IP, litigation, AI governance and legal education
Awesome Legal Skills
awesome-legal-skills
A curated list of skills for agents' legal work: contracts, research, compliance. A list of links under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, foreign law
README in short
The README explains why the author started the project: commercial systems such as Kira and Harvey target enterprises, open tools are unfinished and generic checklists do not tell an NDA from an M&A deal. It continues with installation, a sample request, a feature list, a table of market thresholds, negotiability ratings, jurisdiction handling and M&A specifics. It ends with limitations, accuracy, data sources and a companion project for producing redline documents.
README badge
Original SKILL.md
--- name: contract-review description: Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents. Identifies unfavorable terms, suggests redlines, and compares to market standards. Use for contract analysis, due diligence, or negotiation prep. version: 3.0.0 --- # Contract Review Skill Review legal contracts for risks, extract key terms, and suggest redlines. Built on the CUAD dataset (41 risk categories), ContractEval benchmarks, and LegalBench. ## When to Activate - User mentions "review contract", "analyze agreement", "check this contract" - User uploads or references a PDF/DOCX legal document - User asks about specific clauses, risks, or terms --- ## Step 1: Pre-Review Checklist Before analyzing content, verify document completeness: - [ ] **Blank fields**: Flag any "$X", "TBD", "[amount]", "____" placeholders - [ ] **Missing exhibits**: List all referenced schedules/exhibits and note which are missing - [ ] **Signature status**: Draft or already executed? - [ ] **All pages present**: Check for truncation or missing sections If blank fields or missing exhibits exist, flag prominently in output header. --- ## Step 2: Identify Document Type & User Position **Ask if unclear:** "Which party are you? (customer, vendor, buyer, seller, licensor, licensee, receiving party, disclosing party)" This affects what's "risky": - Customer reviewing vendor agreement → flag vendor-favorable terms - Vendor reviewing own template → flag customer-favorable terms - Buyer in M&A → flag seller-favorable terms - Seller in M&A → flag buyer-favorable terms - Receiving party in NDA → flag disclosing party-favorable terms **Assess power dynamic:** - Startup vs. large enterprise? (limited negotiating leverage) - Standard form vs. negotiated? (some terms non-negotiable)