Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Kromer-Group/Claude-Legalnpx agentmods add commands/kromer-group/claude-legal/briefWrote 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/kromer-group/claude-legal/brief)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/kromer-group/claude-legal/brief"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kromer-group/claude-legal/brief/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/kromer-group/claude-legal/brief"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kromer-group/claude-legal/brief.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 | $0.00017 | $0.01369 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00685 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00274 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00137 |
Grade A, and why
brief 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- brief — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 208 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/brief -- Legal Team Briefing
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Generate contextual briefings for legal work. Supports three modes: daily brief, topic brief, and incident brief.
Important: This command assists with legal workflows but does not provide legal advice. Briefings should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being relied upon.
Invocation
/brief daily # Morning brief of legal-relevant items
/brief topic [query] # Research brief on a specific legal question
/brief incident [topic] # Rapid brief on a developing situation
If no mode is specified, ask the user which type of brief they need.
Modes
Daily Brief
A morning summary of everything a legal team member needs to know to start their day.
Sources to Scan
Check each connected source for legal-relevant items:
Email (if connected):
- New contract requests or review requests
- Compliance questions or reports
- Responses from counterparties on active negotiations
- Flagged or urgent items from the legal team inbox
- External counsel communications
- Regulatory or legal update newsletters
Calendar (if connected):
- Today's meetings that need legal prep (board meetings, deal reviews, vendor calls)
- Upcoming deadlines this week (contract expirations, filing deadlines, response deadlines)
- Recurring legal team syncs
Chat (if connected):
- Overnight messages in legal team channels
- Direct messages requesting legal input
- Mentions of legal-relevant topics (contract, compliance, privacy, NDA, terms)
- Escalations or urgent requests
CLM (if connected):
- Contracts awaiting review or signature
- Approaching expiration dates (next 30 days)
- Newly executed agreements
CRM (if connected):
- Deals moving to stages that require legal involvement
- New opportunities flagged for legal review
Output Format
## Daily Legal Brief -- [Date]
### Urgent / Action Required
[Items needing immediate attention, sorted by urgency]
### Contract Pipeline
- **Awaiting Your Review**: [count and list]
- **Pending Counterparty Response**: [count and list]
- **Approaching Deadlines**: [items due this week]
### New Requests
[Contract review requests, NDA requests, compliance questions received since last brief]
### Calendar Today
[Meetings with legal relevance and what prep is needed]
### Team Activity
[Key messages or updates from legal team channels]
### This Week's Deadlines
[Upcoming deadlines and filing dates]
### Sources Not Available
[Any sources that were not connected or returned errors]
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 · 208 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 526269db619b
brief is a command published in the GitHub repository Kromer-Group/Claude-Legal (11 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,369 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
deps-audit
Audit project dependencies for vulnerabilities, outdated packages, license conflicts, and supply chain risks — then provide actionable remediation strategies.
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
voice-compliance
Voice/telephony compliance check — invokes voice-ai-reviewer to produce TM-voice-{slug}.md with TCPA, STIR/SHAKEN, state recording-consent, EU AI Act Art. 50, and synth-voice deepfake-law gaps.
review-policy
Review a policy document for structure, coverage, and language quality.
at-dsgvo
You are helping an enterprise architect generate an Austrian Data Protection Assessment — the Austrian-specific GDPR layer applied by the Datenschutzbehörde (DSB) under the Datenschutzgesetz (DSG 2018, BGBl. I Nr. 165/1999 as amended). Run this after /arckit:eu-rgpd to add Austrian obligations that go beyond the EU…
au-pspf
You are an enterprise architect generating a Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) compliance assessment for an Australian Government entity or contractor handling government information.