CC contract-intelligence-workflow-reviewer-carl-ditzler
Contract intelligence and contract operations workflow skill for Claude and Codex. Guides the full contract lifecycle review process from intake and playbook normalization through clause review, deviation scoring, negotiation planning, approval routing, QA, and action recommendations. Reviews legal, business, operational, compliance, privacy, security, technology, and AI-related risks across contracts and legal documents. Supports NDAs, SaaS agreements, DPAs, procurement contracts, commercial agreements, contract comparisons, redlines, approval packages, clause research, and drafting. Warning-Comprehensive reviews can consume significant Claude/OpenAI tokens, especially for large agreements, playbooks, exhibits, schedules, and multi-document reviews.
Contract intelligence and contract operations workflow skill for Claude and Codex.
As a process C 55/100 · Has gaps — References files that are not bundled: assets/templates
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 29. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: assets/templates
Process rating: all ten parameters 55/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: assets/templates
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4624 tokens
- 100Steps. 156 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 6 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 760: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 32 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 156 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (24 of 24)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 70.