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 Buildwise-Studios/claude-for-hk-law --skill stakeholder-summarygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Buildwise-Studios/claude-for-hk-lawWrote 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/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/stakeholder-summary)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/stakeholder-summary"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/stakeholder-summary/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/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/stakeholder-summary"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/stakeholder-summary.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 | $0.00091 | $0.02991 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.01496 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00598 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00299 |
Grade A, and why
stakeholder-summary 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.
This is a copy
94% identical to stakeholder-summary — 8 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 193 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Stakeholder Summary
Matter context
Matter context. Check ## Matter workspaces in the practice-level CLAUDE.md. If Enabled is ✗ (the default for in-house users), skip the rest of this paragraph — skills use practice-level context and the matter machinery is invisible. If enabled and there is no active matter, ask: "Which matter is this for? Run /commercial-legal:matter-workspace switch <slug> or say practice-level." Load the active matter's matter.md for matter-specific context and overrides. Write outputs to the matter folder at ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-hk-law/commercial-legal/matters/<matter-slug>/. Never read another matter's files unless Cross-matter context is on.
Destination check
Before producing output, check where it's going. If the user has named a destination (a channel, a distribution list, a counterparty, "everyone"), ask whether it's inside the privilege circle. Public channels, company-wide lists, counterparty/opposing counsel, vendors, and clients (for work product) waive the protection. When the destination looks outside the circle, flag it and offer (a) the privileged version for legal only, (b) a sanitized version for the broader channel, or (c) both — don't silently apply a privileged header and then help paste it somewhere the header won't protect it. See the canonical ## Shared guardrails → Destination check in this plugin's CLAUDE.md.
Purpose
The business owner who asked for this contract doesn't want a legal memo. They want to know: can I sign it, what's the catch, and what do I need to do. This skill takes a completed review and turns it into that.
Which side?
The underlying review memo was run against either the sales-side or the purchasing-side playbook. Carry that framing through. A purchasing-side summary tells the business owner "here's what we're getting and what we agreed to give up"; a sales-side summary tells them "here's what we're selling and what we're on the hook for." Check which side the review was run on (it should be noted at the top of the review memo) and match the voice. If it's not obvious from the memo, ask the lawyer before summarizing.
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 · 193 lines · 91 tokens per session scan A 57327862a999
stakeholder-summary is a skill published in the GitHub repository Buildwise-Studios/claude-for-hk-law (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 2,991 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 94% identical to stakeholder-summary, differing in 8 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
c2pa-metadata
Embed a C2PA provenance manifest into an AI-generated marketing asset (PNG, JPG, WebP, GIF, TIFF, MP4, MOV, WebM, MP3, WAV, PDF) via scripts/embed-c2pa.py — produces a signed copy of the file carrying IPTC digital-source-type AI claims, an optional c2pa.ai-disclosure assertion for EU AI Act Article 50 (applicable 2…
privacy-jp
A Japanese-language document generator for services built with Next.js. It creates privacy policies, terms of service, consent dialogs, and cookie banners while considering Japan's personal-information and consumer-protection laws.
revenue-recognition
Determines when and how revenue is recognized — performance obligations, contract terms that change the answer, and the deal structures that create accounting problems. Use this to work out how a contract should be recognized, review a non-standard deal before it is signed, understand deferred revenue, or spot terms…
contract-review
Reviews and negotiates commercial agreements — MSAs, SOWs, order forms, NDAs, vendor and data-processing agreements — identifying material risk, proposing positions, and recommending a path rather than listing issues. Use this to review a contract before signature, prepare a negotiation position, build fallback…
privacy-and-data-protection
Assesses and improves how personal data is collected, used, shared, and retained — data mapping, lawful basis, consent, processor agreements, subject rights, and breach obligations. Use this before launching anything that handles personal data, when adding a vendor that will process it, when a data subject request…
benefits-and-leave
Designs and runs employee benefits and leave — health and retirement plans, leave policy, cost and renewal, and the administration that keeps them compliant. Use this to design or review a benefits package, prepare for a renewal, write leave policy, handle a leave request, or decide what benefits are worth their cost.