Knowledge Work Plugins is an open-source collection of Claude extensions organized around roles such as productivity, sales, and customer support. Each plugin combines role-specific guidance, connectors, commands, and sub-agents so knowledge workers can use Claude with their team’s tools and processes. The catalogue entries are examples of, or workflows from, this plugin collection.
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/anthropics/knowledge-work-pluginsnpx agentmods add skills/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/review-contractWrote 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/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/review-contract)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/review-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/review-contract/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/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/review-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/review-contract.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk warn
- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00059 | $0.03457 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.01383 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00691 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00346 |
Grade A, and why
review-contract 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 1mo 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
7 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- review-contract — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- review-contract — 95% identical, 10 lines differ
- review-contract-th — 92% identical, 12 lines differ
- contract-review — 89% identical, 194 lines differ
- contract-review — 89% identical, 194 lines differ
- contract-review — 89% identical, 194 lines differ
- contract-review — 89% identical, 194 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 359 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/review-contract -- Contract Review Against Playbook
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Review a contract against your organization's negotiation playbook. Analyze each clause, flag deviations, generate redline suggestions, and provide business impact analysis.
Important: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. All analysis should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being relied upon.
Invocation
/review-contract <contract file or URL>
Review the contract: @$1
Workflow
Step 1: Accept the Contract
Accept the contract in any of these formats:
- File upload: PDF, DOCX, or other document format
- URL: Link to a contract in your CLM, cloud storage (e.g., Box, Egnyte, SharePoint), or other document system
- Pasted text: Contract text pasted directly into the conversation
If no contract is provided, prompt the user to supply one.
Step 2: Gather Context
Ask the user for context before beginning the review:
- Which side are you on? (vendor/supplier, customer/buyer, licensor, licensee, partner -- or other)
- Deadline: When does this need to be finalized? (Affects prioritization of issues)
- Focus areas: Any specific concerns? (e.g., "data protection is critical", "we need flexibility on term", "IP ownership is the key issue")
- Deal context: Any relevant business context? (e.g., deal size, strategic importance, existing relationship)
If the user provides partial context, proceed with what you have and note assumptions.
Step 3: Load the Playbook
Look for the organization's contract review playbook in local settings (e.g., legal.local.md or similar configuration files).
The playbook should define:
- Standard positions: The organization's preferred terms for each major clause type
- Acceptable ranges: Terms that can be agreed to without escalation
- Escalation triggers: Terms that require senior counsel review or outside counsel involvement
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 359 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A 3a6413475f51
review-contract is a skill published in the GitHub repository anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins (33,434 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 3,457 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
fto-triage
Freedom-to-operate triage — a structured first look at potentially blocking patents, not an FTO opinion. Use when a product, process, or feature is being evaluated for blocking patents, when asked whether anything stops a launch, or to build a claim-chart first pass against the most plausible patents before patent…
legal-hold
Issue, refresh, release, or report on legal holds — drafts the hold notice as .docx, updates legalhold fields in log.yaml, and calendars the next refresh. Use when the user says "issue a hold", "refresh hold", "release hold", or asks for a portfolio-wide hold status report.
specification-writing
A workflow for writing complete patent specifications from patent claims and an invention disclosure. It adapts the document to a chosen jurisdiction, such as the US, Europe, or China.
terms-of-service
Draft terms of service and a companion privacy notice matched to the product's form and feature modules, not legal advice, delivered as a Word document.
x-scorecard
OpenSSF Scorecard for assessing open source project security. Check security best practices and compliance. Dependency: This is an x-cmd module. Install x-cmd first (see x-cmd skill for installation options). see x-cmd skill for installation.
ai-risk-management
Apply the NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and adjacent guidance to AI / ML systems — model lifecycle governance, fairness and bias evaluation, robustness, transparency, accountability, third-party model risk, monitoring for drift, and AI incident response. Broader than prompt-injection (which is the…