Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

contract-review(合同审查)

contract-review 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

contract-review 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 55,343。

总安装 485周安装 20GitHub Stars 103下载 158核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:contract-review(合同审查)
来源仓库:https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills
仓库路径:skills/contract-review
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill contract-review
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill contract-review

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

contract-review 用于自动化合同审查,依据组织策略对条款进行风险分级与修订建议。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中快速识别高风险条款并提供 fallback 立场。输出带颜色标记(绿/黄/红)的优先修订清单,支持标准与快速风险评估流程。

安装命令:npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill contract-review。使用前需确认权限范围、维护状态及是否会触发文件读取或网络访问操作。

来源仓库内路径:skills/contract-review

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill contract-review;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

contract-review 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill contract-review。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

contract-review 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

contract-review 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

contract-review 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

contract-review 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 485 次,近一周安装 20 次,下载 158 次,GitHub 103 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

contract-review 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
contract-review

合同审查 · 本页

485103需要联网未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

⚠️ EXPERIMENTAL — This skill is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does NOT constitute legal advice. All responsibility for usage rests with the user. Consult qualified legal professionals before acting on any output.

Contract Review

Automated contract review tools that analyze agreements against organizational playbooks, classify clause risk with GREEN/YELLOW/RED severity, and generate prioritized redline suggestions with fallback positions.


Table of Contents

- Contract Analyzer - Redline Generator

- Standard Contract Review - Rapid Risk Triage


Tools

Contract Analyzer

Analyzes contract text files for clause types, missing standard clauses, and risk indicators.

# Analyze a contract file
python scripts/contract_analyzer.py contract.txt

# JSON output for pipeline integration
python scripts/contract_analyzer.py agreement.md --json

# Save analysis to file
python scripts/contract_analyzer.py contract.txt --output analysis.json --json

What it detects:

  • Clause types: Limitation of Liability, Indemnification, IP, Data Protection, Term & Termination, Governing Law, Reps & Warranties, Force Majeure, Confidentiality, Payment Terms
  • Missing standard clauses against a baseline checklist
  • Risk indicators: uncapped liability, perpetual terms, unilateral indemnification, automatic renewal without opt-out, broad IP assignment, unlimited audit rights

Risk Classification:

LevelMeaningAction
REDDeal-breaker riskMust negotiate before signing
YELLOWMaterial concernShould negotiate, may accept with mitigation
GREENStandard or favorableAcceptable as-is

Redline Generator

Takes contract analysis JSON and generates formatted redline suggestions with priority tiers.

# Generate redlines from analysis
python scripts/contract_analyzer.py contract.txt --json --output analysis.json
python scripts/redline_generator.py analysis.json

# JSON output
python scripts/redline_generator.py analysis.json --json

# Save redlines to file
python scripts/redline_generator.py analysis.json --output redlines.md

Output includes:

  • Priority tier (Must-Have / Should-Have / Nice-to-Have)
  • Preferred redline language
  • Rationale for each change
  • Fallback position if counterparty rejects
  • Negotiation notes

Priority Tiers:

TierLabelDescription
1Must-HaveDeal-breakers; walk away if rejected
2Should-HaveStrong preferences; push hard but negotiable
3Nice-to-HaveConcession candidates; trade for Tier 1-2 wins

Reference Guides

Clause Analysis Guide

references/clause_analysis_guide.md

Deep reference covering 8+ clause types:

  • Limitation of Liability (cap types, carveouts, consequential damages)
  • Indemnification (mutuality, scope, procedure)
  • IP (ownership, licenses, work-for-hire, feedback)
  • Data Protection (DPA, sub-processors, breach notification, transfers)
  • Term & Termination (auto-renewal, cure periods, transition)
  • Governing Law (jurisdiction, arbitration, jury waiver)
  • Representations & Warranties
  • Force Majeure

Negotiation Playbook

references/negotiation_playbook.md

Negotiation priority framework with:

  • Tier 1 deal-breakers and walkaway criteria
  • Tier 2 strong preferences with trading strategies
  • Tier 3 concession candidates for strategic give-backs
  • Redline format template
  • Common negotiation pitfalls

Workflows

Standard Contract Review

  1. Ingest -- Save contract as .txt or .md file
  2. Analyze -- Run contract_analyzer.py with --json flag
  3. Review findings -- Check RED items first, then YELLOW
  4. Generate redlines -- Run redline_generator.py on analysis output
  5. Prioritize -- Focus on Must-Have redlines, prepare fallbacks for Should-Have
  6. Send to counsel -- Attach analysis and redlines for final review

Rapid Risk Triage

  1. Run contract_analyzer.py in text mode for quick scan
  2. If any RED findings: escalate immediately to legal counsel
  3. If YELLOW only: schedule review within 48 hours
  4. If all GREEN: proceed with standard approval workflow

Troubleshooting

ProblemCauseSolution
Error: File not foundContract file path is incorrect or file does not existVerify the file path; use absolute paths if relative paths fail
No clauses detectedContract uses unusual formatting or non-standard clause headersEnsure contract is plain text; strip PDF artifacts before analysis
All clauses marked GREENContract is genuinely favorable, or text extraction missed key sectionsManually verify critical clauses (liability, indemnification, IP) are present in the input file
Redline generator produces empty outputAnalysis JSON has no YELLOW or RED findingsConfirm analysis JSON is valid; re-run analyzer if contract was updated
False positive on uncapped liabilityLiability section references a cap elsewhere in the documentReview the full Limitation of Liability section; the tool scans for cap keywords within each clause boundary
Missing clause false positiveClause exists but uses non-standard heading (e.g., "Damages Cap" instead of "Limitation of Liability")The analyzer checks multiple heading variants; add custom aliases if your organization uses unique terminology

Success Criteria

  • Contract review time reduced by 50%: Automated clause identification and risk classification eliminates manual scanning.
  • Zero missed RED-severity clauses: Every uncapped liability, unilateral indemnification, and broad IP assignment is flagged before human review.
  • Redline generation under 2 minutes: From analysis JSON to prioritized redline document.
  • Consistent risk classification across reviewers: GREEN/YELLOW/RED framework eliminates subjective assessments.
  • 100% of contracts reviewed with structured output: Every agreement gets a clause inventory and risk report before negotiation begins.
  • Negotiation success rate above 80% on Must-Have items: Tier 1 redlines with prepared fallbacks improve negotiation outcomes.

Scope & Limitations

Covers:

  • Static text analysis of contract clauses using keyword and pattern matching
  • Clause type identification across 10+ standard commercial contract categories
  • Risk indicator detection: uncapped liability, perpetual terms, unilateral obligations, auto-renewal traps
  • Missing clause detection against a standard commercial contract baseline
  • Prioritized redline generation with fallback positions

Does NOT cover:

  • Legal advice -- this tool supports review, it does not replace qualified legal counsel
  • Jurisdiction-specific compliance -- use ra-qm-team skills for regulatory compliance (GDPR, SOC 2, etc.)
  • Contract execution or e-signature workflows -- out of scope
  • Multi-document cross-reference (e.g., checking SOW against MSA) -- analyze each document separately
  • Non-English contracts -- pattern matching is English-language only

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternWhy It FailsBetter Approach
Signing contracts with only GREEN findings and no human reviewAutomated analysis cannot catch context-dependent risks, ambiguous language, or business-specific concernsAlways have qualified counsel review before execution, even on all-GREEN contracts
Treating all RED findings as equalSome RED items are structural deal-breakers while others may be resolvable with a single word changeUse the redline generator to assess effort and fallback positions for each RED finding
Skipping the redline fallback positionsEntering negotiation with only preferred positions leaves no room for strategic concessionAlways prepare Must-Have fallbacks and identify Nice-to-Have items to trade away
Running analysis on poorly extracted textPDF-to-text conversion artifacts break clause detection patternsClean the text file before analysis: remove headers, footers, page numbers, and formatting artifacts

Tool Reference

contract_analyzer.py

Purpose: Analyzes contract text files for clause types, identifies missing standard clauses, and flags risk indicators with GREEN/YELLOW/RED severity classification.

Usage:

python scripts/contract_analyzer.py <contract_file> [--json] [--output FILE]

Flags:

FlagShortDefaultDescription
contract_file*(positional)*Path to contract text file (.txt or.md)
--jsonoffOutput in JSON format
--output-o*(stdout)*Write output to file

Example Output (JSON):

{
  "file": "vendor_agreement.txt",
  "clauses_found": [
    {
      "type": "limitation_of_liability",
      "severity": "RED",
      "text_snippet": "...liability shall not be limited...",
      "risk_flags": ["uncapped_liability"],
      "notes": "No liability cap found; uncapped exposure"
    }
  ],
  "missing_clauses": ["force_majeure", "data_protection"],
  "risk_summary": {"RED": 2, "YELLOW": 3, "GREEN": 5},
  "overall_risk": "RED"
}

redline_generator.py

Purpose: Takes contract analysis JSON and generates formatted redline suggestions with priority tiers, rationale, and fallback positions.

Usage:

python scripts/redline_generator.py <analysis_json> [--json] [--output FILE]

Flags:

FlagShortDefaultDescription
analysis_json*(positional)*Path to contract analysis JSON file
--jsonoffOutput in JSON format
--output-o*(stdout)*Write output to file

Example Output:

REDLINE SUGGESTIONS
===================

[MUST-HAVE] Limitation of Liability — Uncapped Liability
  Severity: RED
  Preferred: "Aggregate liability shall not exceed 12 months of fees paid."
  Rationale: Uncapped liability creates unlimited financial exposure.
  Fallback: "Aggregate liability shall not exceed 24 months of fees paid."

[SHOULD-HAVE] Indemnification — Unilateral Indemnification
  Severity: YELLOW
  Preferred: "Each party shall indemnify the other for breaches of this Agreement."
  Rationale: Mutual indemnification balances risk between parties.
  Fallback: "Indemnification obligations shall be subject to the liability cap."

平台分布

Codex

38.11%
按下载量换算60

Claude

29.43%
按下载量换算46

Cursor

16.66%
按下载量换算26

Gemini CLI

10.09%
按下载量换算16

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills