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.
npx skills add akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop --skill plan-contract-pushbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/akiotanaka847/qaio-desktopWrote 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/skills/akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop/plan-contract-pushback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop/plan-contract-pushback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop/plan-contract-pushback/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/skills/akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop/plan-contract-pushback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop/plan-contract-pushback.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 | $0.00071 | $0.01379 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00690 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00276 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00138 |
Grade A, and why
plan-contract-pushback 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 8d 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 — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Plan Contract Pushback
When to use
- "Draft redline strategy for {counterparty} contract" / "what push back on?" / "prioritize redlines - limited leverage".
- After
review-a-contract(mode=full) surfaces Yellow + Red clauses, founder needs negotiation sequence.
Run once per contract version after review. Counterparty counters → run again on new version.
Steps
-
Read shared context. Load
legal-context.mdfor founder risk posture + escalation rules. Loadconfig/posture.jsonfor clause-level walk-away positions. -
Read upstream review. Find matching
contract-reviews/{counterparty-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md. Missing → stop and ask the user in plain language: "I haven't reviewed this contract yet. Want me to do that first?" Don't proceed until that's done. Pull full clause table (Green / Yellow / Red + current text + market standard). -
Ask founder two things if unknown. Both in one message, not two turns:
- Goal for deal - close fast / protect IP / limit liability / walk-away leverage / keep optionality for later rounds?
- Counterparty leverage - who whale? Customer needed this quarter, or 3 other pipeline deals at similar ACV? Honest read.
-
Sort every Yellow + Red clause into three tiers:
- Must-have redlines - won't sign without. Week-0 founder defaults: uncapped liability cap replaced with cap anchored to fees; IP assignment of core product struck; one-way indemnity against us made mutual; AI-training carve-out training on our data struck; non-compete on us struck. Adjust based on founder posture + leverage.
- Nice-to-have redlines - push if leverage, punt if not. Examples: termination for convenience 30-day notice instead of 60, wider breach-notification SLA, broader exit / data-retrieval rights.
- Can-punt - Yellows marked "keep as-is, livable". One-line reason per item so founder knows why not pushing.
-
Write exact redline language for every must-have. Not "ask for liability cap" - actual replacement text. Example:
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 92 lines · 71 tokens per session scan A 2d3afdb2c736
plan-contract-pushback is a skill published in the GitHub repository akiotanaka847/qaio-desktop (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 1,379 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 skills, from other repositories
contracts
Use when drafting or reviewing business contracts and clauses in plain language — NDAs, MSAs, SOWs, contractor agreements, risk boilerplate (liability caps, indemnity, force majeure, termination, IP) — or redlining a counterparty's paper. NOT consumer Terms of Service (that is terms-conditions) and NOT the signing…
lawyer-expert
Expert-level legal systems, contracts, compliance, and legal technology. Use when the user mentions legal, contracts, compliance, law, or legal tech, or when the task involves Legal Systems, Legal Technology, Compliance Frameworks, or Contract Management.
legaltech-expert
Expert in legal technology: contract lifecycle management, e-discovery, AI-assisted legal research, case and matter management, document automation, and compliance tooling. Use when the user mentions legal case or matter management, e-discovery and legal holds, CLM or contract review and obligation tracking, legal…
Contract Drafter
Generate legal contracts from templates with variable substitution and clause management.
Contract Analyzer
Review contracts to identify key terms, risks, obligations, and negotiation opportunities.
Contract Risk Review
Use when reviewing a general commercial contract — such as a master services agreement, vendor agreement, supplier contract, or professional services agreement — to produce a structured risk assessment and prioritized issue list for attorney review.