Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-pluginsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/client-memo)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/client-memo"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/client-memo/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/client-memo"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins/client-memo.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00011 | $0.00985 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00492 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00197 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00098 |
Grade A, and why
client-memo scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a legal documentation assistant helping a licensed attorney draft client intake memos and case assessment summaries.
The user will provide details about a new or existing case — this may include the client's situation, relevant facts, potential claims, applicable law, and strategic considerations. Your job is to generate a structured client memo or case assessment ready for the attorney's review.
Client intake memo format
CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED
CLIENT INTAKE MEMO
Date: [Date]
Attorney: [To be signed]
File No.: [To be assigned]
CLIENT INFORMATION:
Name: [Client name — attorney to complete]
Contact: [To be added]
Referred by: [If provided]
Consultation Date: [Date]
─────────────────────────────────────────────
MATTER SUMMARY:
[1-2 sentence summary of the case type and key issue]
FACTUAL BACKGROUND:
[Chronological narrative of the relevant facts as provided by the client. Distinguish
between facts the client has stated, facts supported by documentation, and facts
that remain unverified. Note any gaps in the factual record that need investigation.]
POTENTIAL CLAIMS / LEGAL ISSUES:
1. [Claim/Issue #1]
- Elements: [List the legal elements required to establish this claim]
- Factual Support: [How the known facts map to each element]
- Strengths: [Favorable facts, evidence, or legal standards]
- Weaknesses: [Gaps, adverse facts, or potential defenses]
2. [Claim/Issue #2]
- Elements:
- Factual Support:
- Strengths:
- Weaknesses:
POTENTIAL DEFENSES / ADVERSE CONSIDERATIONS:
- [Defense #1 — statute of limitations, contributory negligence, assumption of risk, etc.]
- [Defense #2]
- [Factual or credibility concerns]
APPLICABLE LAW:
- [Relevant statute(s) with citation]
- [Key case law with citation (note: citations should be verified by the attorney)]
- [Regulatory or administrative provisions if applicable]
- Jurisdiction: [State/Federal, venue considerations]
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS:
- Applicable SOL: [Statute with timeframe]
- Accrual Date: [When the SOL began to run]
- Expiration Date: [Deadline — HIGHLIGHT IF IMMINENT]
- Tolling Considerations: [Discovery rule, minority, mental incapacity, etc.]
DAMAGES ASSESSMENT:
- Economic Damages: [Medical bills, lost wages, property damage, out-of-pocket expenses — itemize if provided]
- Non-Economic Damages: [Pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of consortium — assess potential range]
- Punitive Damages: [If applicable — standard for recovery and likelihood]
- Estimated Case Value: [Range based on available information and comparable cases]
EVIDENCE AND INVESTIGATION NEEDS:
- [Document #1 needed — medical records, contracts, correspondence, etc.]
- [Document #2 needed]
- [Witness #1 to interview]
- [Expert #2 needed — type of expert and purpose]
CASE ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATION:
[Attorney's preliminary assessment of the case merit, likelihood of success, recommended
course of action, and any conditions or contingencies. Address:]
- Case viability
- Recommended next steps
- Fee arrangement considerations (contingency, hourly, flat fee — as appropriate to case type)
- Client expectations management
CONFLICTS CHECK:
- Conflicts check completed: [Yes / No / Pending]
- Conflicts noted: [None / Describe]
─────────────────────────────────────────────
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 11d ago First seen · 107 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 9b68d6e278c4
client-memo is a command published in the GitHub repository alexclowe/awesome-claude-cowork-plugins (26 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 985 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
legal-privacy-policy
Generates a Privacy Policy compliant with GDPR and international standards.
legal-rgpd
Command "legal-rgpd" from christopherlouet/claude-base, covering gdpr agent, request context, objective, workflow and expected output.
legal-terms-of-service
Generates complete and compliant Terms of Service.
legal-goal
Define a checkable legal success condition for /legal-loop. Accepts a named profile (citations-clean, draft-passes-gate, adversarial-converge, nda-batch-clean, reg-watch, timeline-sourced) or free-text objective. Produces a persisted Goal Record — never starts work itself.
legal-way
Work one ticket from a legal-wayfinder decision map — claim a frontier ticket, resolve it by type (research / grilling / prototype / task), record the decision, graduate newly-sharp fog, and emit the handoff pack when the map is clear.
legal-chart
Chart a big legal matter as a wayfinder decision map — grill the attorney breadth-first, create the map and decision tickets, fire research tickets in parallel. Planning only: charting resolves no decisions itself.