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/Tough-Respawn/claude-legal-skills-franceWrote 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/tough-respawn/claude-legal-skills-france/rediger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/tough-respawn/claude-legal-skills-france/rediger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/tough-respawn/claude-legal-skills-france/rediger/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/tough-respawn/claude-legal-skills-france/rediger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/tough-respawn/claude-legal-skills-france/rediger.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00245 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00122 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00049 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00024 |
Grade A, and why
rediger 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 today.
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.
What it actually says
Démarrer le workflow de rédaction documentaire.
Workflow
- Lire
lib/redacteur-engine.mdpour le déroulement complet. - Si l'argument
<type-de-document>est absent → lister les templates disponibles (table de la section 2 du fichier engine). - Si l'argument est un slug connu → charger le fichier template correspondant.
- Si l'argument est inconnu → proposer 2-3 templates les plus proches.
- Suivre les 6 étapes du workflow (qualification et pièces → vérification de la version applicable et calculs → génération → disclaimer renforcé → disclaimer standard).
- Vérifier les sources officielles dans la version applicable aux faits avant finalisation. Une inconnue décisive impose une question ciblée ou un brouillon explicitement incomplet.
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.
- today Changed 73b0f5b11d9a
- 12d ago First seen · 16 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A ff576c7bcbff
rediger is a command published in the GitHub repository Tough-Respawn/claude-legal-skills-france (6 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 245 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 2026-08-31.
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.