Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

legal-writer(法律作家)

legal-writer 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。

legal-writer 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,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 40,339。

总安装 1,297周安装 53GitHub Stars 3下载 420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:legal-writer(法律作家)
来源仓库:https://github.com/kortix-ai/kortix-registry
仓库路径:skills/legal-writer
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/kortix-ai/kortix-registry --skill legal-writer
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/kortix-ai/kortix-registry --skill legal-writer

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。

legal-writer 用于法律写作相关的信息检索与筛选,适合法律文书起草与润色场景。支持基于关键词、文书类型或法规要求定位候选资料,适用于法律文本生成。通过 npx skills add 命令从 GitHub 仓库安装,需确认权限与维护状态。建议在使用前核实是否涉及联网或文件读写,避免意外行为。

可结合原始 README 了解具体调用方式与适用限制。

来源仓库内路径:skills/legal-writer

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/kortix-ai/kortix-registry --skill legal-writer;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

    它需要接触敏感数据,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

legal-writer 怎么安装?

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

legal-writer 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。

legal-writer 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

legal-writer 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。

legal-writer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,297 次,近一周安装 53 次,下载 420 次,GitHub 3 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。

legal-writer 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

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。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 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

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 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
legal-writer

法律作家 · 本页

1,2973接触敏感数据未明确有提醒

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

Legal Document Writer

Draft publication-quality legal documents in DOCX (Word) format with a test-driven workflow: every section is verified before moving to the next. Covers contracts, memos, briefs, complaints, demand letters, and more.

Bundled Resources

Find the skill directory via glob("**/KORTIX-legal-writer/").

ResourcePathPurpose
Verifierscripts/verify-legal.pyTDD verification suite (10 checks)
Case law APIscripts/courtlistener.pyCourtListener search/lookup for case citations
Regulation APIscripts/ecfr_lookup.pyeCFR + Federal Register lookup for statutes/regs
Bluebook refreferences/bluebook.mdBluebook citation format quick reference
Doc type refreferences/document-types.mdSection templates for every document type

The TDD Rule

After writing every section of the document:

1. WRITE section content
2. GENERATE: build/update the DOCX via the docx skill
3. VERIFY:   python3 verify-legal.py legal/{slug}/
4. If FAIL → FIX → go to 2
5. If PASS → move to next section

The document must pass verification at every step. Never batch errors.

Pipeline Overview

Phase 1: SCAFFOLD  →  Create project, metadata.json, empty DOCX with structure
                       Verify: document exists and has correct sections ✓

Phase 2: RESEARCH  →  Case law, statutes, regulations (if litigation/regulatory doc)
                       Verify: citations are formatted correctly ✓

Phase 3: WRITE     →  Per-section drafting in logical order
                       Verify: verify-legal.py after EACH section ✓

Phase 4: POLISH    →  Self-reflection pass, strict verification, final DOCX
                       Verify: verify-legal.py --strict with zero warnings ✓

Filesystem Architecture

legal/{document-slug}/
├── metadata.json           # Document type, parties, jurisdiction, etc.
├── document.docx           # The main document (generated via docx)
├── research/               # Case law, statutes, notes (optional)
│   ├── cases.json          # CourtListener search results
│   ├── regulations.json    # eCFR lookup results
│   └── notes.md            # Research notes
└── versions/               # Prior versions (optional)

metadata.json

This file drives verification. Create it during scaffold:

{
  "type": "contract",
  "title": "Services Agreement",
  "jurisdiction": "State of Delaware",
  "governing_law": "Delaware",
  "date": "2025-01-15",
  "parties": [
    {"name": "Acme Corporation", "short_name": "Company", "role": "client"},
    {"name": "Jane Smith Consulting LLC", "short_name": "Contractor", "role": "contractor"}
  ],
  "word_limit": null,
  "page_limit": null
}

For briefs/motions, include word_limit or page_limit from court rules.

Phase 1: Scaffold

1a. Identify document type

Read references/document-types.md for the section template matching the requested document type. The major types:

TypeKeyUse Case
Legal memorandummemoInternal analysis, predictive
Motion briefbriefPersuasive, court filing
Contract/AgreementcontractTransactional, bilateral obligations
Complaint/PetitioncomplaintInitiating litigation
Demand letterdemandPre-litigation claim
Legal opinionopinionFormal legal opinion for transaction
Discovery requestsdiscoveryInterrogatories, doc requests
Settlement agreementsettlementResolving dispute
Terms of ServicetosUser-facing terms
Privacy PolicyprivacyData privacy compliance

1b. Create project structure

SLUG="document-slug-here"
mkdir -p "legal/$SLUG"/{research,versions}

1c. Create metadata.json

Write the JSON file with document type, parties, jurisdiction, and any constraints.

1d. Generate initial DOCX

Load the docx skill. Use python-docx to create the document with:

  • Proper heading styles (Heading 1, 2, 3 for section structure)
  • 12pt font (Times New Roman or similar serif for court filings)
  • 1-inch margins (adjust per jurisdiction — see court rules)
  • Double-spacing for briefs/court filings, single for contracts
  • Proper page numbering
  • Section headers matching the document type template from references/document-types.md
  • Placeholder text: [TO BE DRAFTED] in each section

1e. VERIFY: First green state

python3 verify-legal.py legal/$SLUG/

The scaffolded document should exist and have correct structure. Placeholders are expected at this stage (they'll be flagged as warnings, not failures, unless --strict).

Phase 2: Legal Research (if applicable)

For litigation documents (memos, briefs, complaints) and regulatory documents, research case law and statutes before writing.

Case Law Search (CourtListener)

SKILL_DIR="..."  # from glob
# Search for relevant cases
python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/courtlistener.py" search "search terms" --after 2015 --limit 10

# Get specific opinion details
python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/courtlistener.py" opinion 12345

# Format as Bluebook citation
python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/courtlistener.py" bluebook 12345

Save results to research/cases.json. Extract key holdings for use in the document.

Note: CourtListener requires a free API token for higher rate limits. Set COURTLISTENER_API_TOKEN env var. Without it, limited to 100 requests/day.

Statute/Regulation Lookup (eCFR)

# Search regulations
python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/ecfr_lookup.py" search "employment discrimination" --title 29

# Get specific CFR section
python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/ecfr_lookup.py" section 16 444.1

# Search Federal Register for recent rules
python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/ecfr_lookup.py" fedreg "data privacy"

No API key required.

Citation Formatting

Read references/bluebook.md for Bluebook citation format. Key rules:

  • Cases: *Party v. Party*, Vol Reporter Page, Pin (Court Year).
  • Statutes: Title U.S.C. § Section (Year).
  • Regulations: Title C.F.R. § Section (Year).
  • Pinpoint cites required — always cite to the specific page.
  • Short forms after first full citation: *Id.*, *supra*, or party name + reporter.

For non-litigation documents (contracts, ToS), formal citations are generally not needed — just reference applicable law by name and section.

Phase 3: Per-Section Writing

Writing Order by Document Type

Contract: Definitions → Core obligations → Reps & warranties → Indemnification → Limitation of liability → Term/termination → General provisions → Preamble/recitals (last, once scope is clear)

Memo: Question Presented → Brief Answer → Statement of Facts → Discussion (IRAC per issue) → Conclusion

Brief: Statement of Facts → Argument (strongest points first) → Introduction/Summary (last, once you know what to say) → Conclusion

Complaint: Parties → Jurisdiction/Venue → Statement of Facts → Causes of Action → Prayer for Relief

The Writing Loop (for each section)

1. READ all previously written sections for context
2. WRITE the section following document-type conventions
3. REGENERATE the DOCX (update via python-docx)
4. VERIFY: python3 verify-legal.py legal/{slug}/
5. If errors → FIX → go to 3
6. SELF-REFLECT:
   - Is every legal assertion supported by authority? (litigation docs)
   - Are defined terms used consistently?
   - Any ambiguous language? ("reasonable" without standard, "timely" without deadline)
   - Cross-references point to correct sections?
   - No placeholder text remaining in this section?
7. REVISE if needed → regenerate → verify
8. Section DONE → next

Legal Writing Standards

Apply these throughout all sections:

Clarity over formality:

  • "before" not "prior to"
  • "about" not "with respect to"
  • "if" not "in the event that"
  • "under" not "pursuant to"
  • "to" not "in order to"

Precision:

  • "shall" = duty/obligation (the party SHALL do X)
  • "will" = future event or declaration
  • "may" = permission (the party MAY do X)
  • "must" = condition/requirement
  • Never use "shall" for anything other than imposing a duty

Defined terms:

  • Define on first use: "Effective Date" means [definition].
  • Capitalize consistently throughout: always "Effective Date", never "effective date"
  • Alphabetize in definitions section
  • Don't over-define (common English words don't need definitions)

Sentence structure:

  • Active voice: "The Contractor shall deliver" not "Delivery shall be made"
  • Front-load: put the actor and action first
  • One idea per sentence in contracts (each obligation = one sentence)
  • Short paragraphs (max 4-5 sentences in persuasive writing)

Numbers and dates:

  • Spell out numbers 1-9, use digits for 10+
  • Dates: "January 15, 2025" (consistent throughout)
  • Money: "$50,000" or "Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000)" (for contracts, both)
  • Time periods: "thirty (30) days" in contracts; "30 days" in memos/briefs

Section-Specific Guidance

Contracts: Definitions Section
"Agreement" means this Services Agreement, including all exhibits and schedules.

"Confidential Information" means any information disclosed by one party to the
other that is designated as confidential or that reasonably should be understood
to be confidential given the nature of the information and the circumstances of
disclosure.

"Deliverables" means the work product to be delivered by Contractor as described
in Exhibit A.
Contracts: Limitation of Liability
IN NO EVENT SHALL EITHER PARTY BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER PARTY FOR ANY
INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES,
REGARDLESS OF THE CAUSE OF ACTION OR THE THEORY OF LIABILITY, EVEN IF
SUCH PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

THE TOTAL AGGREGATE LIABILITY OF [PARTY] UNDER THIS AGREEMENT SHALL NOT
EXCEED THE TOTAL FEES PAID BY [OTHER PARTY] DURING THE TWELVE (12) MONTH
PERIOD PRECEDING THE CLAIM.
Memos: IRAC Discussion Structure

For each legal issue:

[ISSUE] The issue is whether [legal question under specific law/standard].

[RULE] Under [jurisdiction] law, [state the rule]. See [Authority]. The [court]
has held that [rule elaboration]. [Authority]. Courts consider [factors/elements]:
(1) [factor]; (2) [factor]; and (3) [factor]. [Authority].

[APPLICATION] Here, [apply each factor to the client's facts]. First, [fact]
satisfies [factor] because [reasoning]. See [analogous case]. Unlike in
[distinguishable case], where [different facts led to different outcome], here
[explain why our facts are more like the favorable case].

[CONCLUSION] Therefore, [conclusion on this issue]. A court would likely
[prediction].
Briefs: Argument Headings

Headings should be complete persuasive sentences:

Good:  "I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT BECAUSE
            GENUINE DISPUTES OF MATERIAL FACT EXIST."
Bad:   "I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT"

Good:  "A. Plaintiff's Deposition Testimony Creates a Triable Issue of Fact
            Regarding Defendant's Knowledge of the Defect."
Bad:   "A. Deposition Testimony"
Complaints: Numbered Paragraphs

Every factual allegation gets its own numbered paragraph:

12. On or about March 15, 2024, Plaintiff entered into a written agreement
    with Defendant for the purchase of the Property (the "Purchase Agreement").
    A true and correct copy of the Purchase Agreement is attached hereto as
    Exhibit A and incorporated by reference.

13. Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Purchase Agreement, Defendant represented
    and warranted that the Property was free of all environmental contamination.

14. On or about June 1, 2024, Plaintiff discovered that the Property contained
    significant levels of lead contamination in the soil.

Phase 4: Polish & Final Verification

4a. Self-Reflection Pass

Re-read the entire document and check:

  1. Consistency: Same terminology, same party names, same defined terms throughout
  2. Completeness: All required sections present for document type, no gaps in logic
  3. Cross-references: Every "Section X.Y" reference is correct after any reordering
  4. Defined terms: Every capitalized term is defined, every definition is used
  5. Ambiguity: No vague terms without standards, no dangling pronouns
  6. Placeholders: Zero [INSERT], [TBD], [TODO], or blank lines remaining
  7. Dates and numbers: Consistent format throughout
  8. Citations: (for litigation docs) All citations in Bluebook format with pinpoints

4b. Strict Verification

python3 "$SKILL_DIR/scripts/verify-legal.py" "legal/$SLUG/" --strict

All checks must pass:

  • Document exists and is non-trivial size
  • Defined terms: all defined, all used, consistent capitalization
  • Cross-references: section/exhibit/schedule references valid
  • Citations: proper format (litigation docs only)
  • Zero placeholders / TODOs / draft artifacts
  • Party names used consistently
  • Required boilerplate provisions present (contracts)
  • Modal verb consistency (shall/must/may/will)
  • Word count within limits (briefs)
  • Date format consistency

4c. Final Output

The deliverable is legal/{slug}/document.docx. If the user needs PDF, convert:

# If libreoffice is available:
libreoffice --headless --convert-to pdf "legal/$SLUG/document.docx" --outdir "legal/$SLUG/"

# Or use python-docx2pdf:
pip install docx2pdf && python3 -c "from docx2pdf import convert; convert('legal/$SLUG/document.docx')"

DOCX Formatting Standards

When generating the DOCX (via docx skill / python-docx):

Court Filings (briefs, motions, complaints)

  • Font: Times New Roman, 12pt (or Century Schoolbook 12pt)
  • Spacing: Double-spaced body text
  • Margins: 1 inch all sides (check local rules — some require 1.5" left)
  • Page numbers: Bottom center
  • Caption: Court name, parties, case number — use the court's required format
  • Line numbers: Required in some jurisdictions (e.g., California state courts)

Contracts and Transactional Documents

  • Font: Times New Roman or Calibri, 11-12pt
  • Spacing: Single-spaced or 1.15
  • Margins: 1 inch all sides
  • Section numbering: Article → Section: 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, etc.
  • Defined terms: Bold on first definition
  • Signature blocks: Right-aligned or centered, with lines for signature/name/title/date
  • All-caps: Use sparingly — limitation of liability and disclaimer sections only
  • Headers: Document title + confidential marking if applicable
  • Footers: Page numbers, draft date if working draft

General

  • Heading styles: Use Word Heading 1/2/3 styles (enables auto TOC)
  • Paragraph styles: Use consistent named styles, not manual formatting
  • Page breaks: Before major section headings (Articles in contracts, main sections in briefs)
  • Widow/orphan control: Enabled (no single lines at page top/bottom)

Jurisdiction-Specific Notes

Always check local rules before filing any court document. Key variations:

JurisdictionFontSpacingMarginsSpecial
Federal appellate14pt proportional serifDouble1" allWord limit varies by circuit
U.S. Supreme Court12pt Century2pt leadingSpecial text fieldBooklet format
California state13pt+ proportional serifDouble1.5" left/rightLine numbers required
New York state12pt+ proportionalDouble1" allVaries by court
Most federal district12pt TNR or similarDouble1" allCheck local rules

When in doubt: 12pt Times New Roman, double-spaced, 1-inch margins is safe for most courts.

平台分布

Codex

36.93%
按下载量换算155

Claude

32.12%
按下载量换算135

Cursor

19.75%
按下载量换算83

Gemini CLI

8.33%
按下载量换算35

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。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