law-contract
Analyze contract fundamentals including formation requirements (offer, acceptance, consideration), essential clauses, and common risk areas. Use this skill when the user needs to review a contract, understand contract terms, identify risky clauses, or draft contract provisions — even if they say 'review this agreement', 'what should I watch out for in this contract', or 'is this clause standard'.
pinned to #4e7f4f8updated last month
Ask your AI client: “install skills/law-contract”.
Requires the metahub MCP server installed in your client. Set up MCP.
mh install skills/law-contractmetahub onboarded this repo on the author's behalf.
If you own github.com/asgard-ai-platform/skills on GitHub, claim the listing to take over publishing. Your claim preserves the existing eval history and badges; only the curator label is replaced with verified-publisher on your next publish.
Stars
225
Last commit
last month
Latest release
published
- #ai-agent
- #anthropic
- #claude
- #claude-agent-skills
- #claude-code
- #coding-agent
- #knowledge-base
- #mcp
- #methodology
- #open-source
- #prompt-engineering
- #skills
- #taiwan
Automated checks the publisher passed at publish time — structure, docs, safety, and whether the artifact behaves as claimed.4e7f4f8· last month
Documentation
8 passed1 warningHomepage or repository declaredwarn
No homepage or repository declared.
Add a "homepage" or "repository" field to SKILL.md.
Description quality
58 words · 399 chars — "Analyze contract fundamentals including formation requirements (offer, acceptanc…"
README is present and substantial
33,936 chars · 20 sections · 3 code blocks
Tags / topics declared
13 total — ai-agent, anthropic, claude, claude-agent-skills, claude-code, coding-agent (+7)
README has usage / example sections
no labeled section but 3 code blocks document usage
Homepage / docs URL declared
https://vault.asgard-ai.com/skills/
Description is substantive
Description is 58 words.
Documentation present and substantive
Documentation present (SKILL.md, 840 words).
Documentation shows usage
Documentation includes 2 code examples.
Release history
1- releasecurrent4e7f4f8warnlast month
Contents
Contract Analysis
Overview
Contract law governs enforceable agreements. This skill covers formation requirements, essential clauses, and common risk areas for business contracts. It is educational guidance, not legal advice — always consult a qualified attorney for specific situations.
Framework
IRON LAW: A Contract Requires Offer + Acceptance + Consideration + Legality
All four elements must be present for a valid contract. Missing any one
means no enforceable contract exists — regardless of how formal the document
looks. A signed document without consideration (exchange of value) is
not a contract.
Contract Formation
| Element | Definition | Test |
|---|---|---|
| Offer | Clear, definite proposal with intent to be bound | Would a reasonable person understand this as a binding proposal? |
| Acceptance | Unqualified agreement to the offer's terms | Mirror image rule: acceptance must match the offer exactly |
| Consideration | Something of value exchanged by both parties | Each side gives up something (money, services, rights, promises) |
| Legality | Subject matter must be legal and parties must have capacity | No illegal purpose; parties must be competent adults or authorized entities |
Essential Contract Clauses
| Clause | Purpose | Red Flags |
|---|---|---|
| Parties | Who is bound | Incorrect entity name, no authority to sign |
| Scope/Subject | What is being exchanged | Vague deliverables, undefined terms |
| Payment terms | When and how payment occurs | No payment schedule, no late payment consequences |
| Term & Termination | Duration and exit conditions | Auto-renewal without notice, no termination for cause |
| Liability & Indemnity | Who bears risk | Unlimited liability, one-sided indemnification |
| Confidentiality (NDA) | Information protection | Overly broad definition, no time limit |
| IP ownership | Who owns created work | Ambiguous ownership of work product |
| Non-compete | Restrictions after termination | Overly broad scope/geography/duration |
| Dispute resolution | How conflicts are resolved | Foreign jurisdiction, mandatory arbitration without consent |
| Force majeure | Excused performance for unforeseeable events | Too narrow or too broad definition |
Contract Review Steps
- Identify the parties: Who is agreeing? Are entity names correct?
- Understand the deal: What is each side giving and receiving?
- Check formation elements: Offer, acceptance, consideration, legality — all present?
- Review essential clauses: Use the table above as a checklist
- Flag risk areas: Unlimited liability, one-sided terms, vague scope, auto-renewal
- Check governing law: Which jurisdiction's law applies? Is the dispute resolution mechanism acceptable?
Output Format
# Contract Review: {Agreement Type}
## Parties
- Party A: {name, role}
- Party B: {name, role}
## Deal Summary
{What is being exchanged — in plain language}
## Clause Review
| Clause | Present? | Assessment | Risk Level |
|--------|---------|-----------|-----------|
| Scope | Y/N | {notes} | 🟢/🟡/🔴 |
| Payment | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Termination | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Liability | Y/N | ... | ... |
| IP | Y/N | ... | ... |
| Non-compete | Y/N | ... | ... |
## Red Flags
1. {specific concern with clause reference}
## Recommendations
1. {suggested modification}
Examples
Correct Application
Scenario: SaaS service agreement review
- Red flag: "Vendor may modify pricing with 30 days' notice" → One-sided price change clause. Should be: pricing locked for contract term, changes only at renewal.
- Red flag: "Client indemnifies Vendor against all claims" → One-sided indemnification. Should be mutual.
- Missing: No SLA (service level agreement) defined → No recourse if service goes down. Recommend adding uptime commitment with credits ✓
Incorrect Application
- "This contract looks fine because both parties signed it" → Signature doesn't make every clause fair or enforceable. Must review individual clause terms. A signed contract with an unconscionable clause may still be challenged.
Gotchas
- "Standard contract" doesn't mean fair: Vendor-drafted "standard" contracts are drafted in the vendor's favor. Everything is negotiable.
- Taiwan-specific: Taiwan's Civil Code governs contracts. Key differences from common law: no consideration requirement (promise for promise is sufficient), mandatory provisions in certain contract types (labor, consumer).
- Auto-renewal traps: Many contracts auto-renew unless notice is given 30-90 days before expiry. Calendar the notice deadline.
- This skill is NOT legal advice: It provides educational analysis of contract concepts. Always consult a licensed attorney for binding legal decisions.
References
- For Taiwan-specific contract law (Civil Code), see
references/taiwan-contract-law.md - For common contract templates, see
references/contract-templates.md
Reviews
No reviews yet. Be the first.
Related
Verification Before Completion
Evidence before assertions, always
Writing Plans
Turn specs into phased implementation plans
Test-Driven Development
Red → green → refactor discipline for any feature or bugfix
mh install skills/law-contract