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 vendor-agreement-reviewgit 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/vendor-agreement-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/vendor-agreement-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/vendor-agreement-review/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/vendor-agreement-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/vendor-agreement-review.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 | $0.00085 | $0.05737 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.02868 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.01147 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00574 |
Grade A, and why
vendor-agreement-review 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 12d 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 — 349 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Vendor Agreement Review
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
Read a vendor agreement against the playbook this team actually uses (in ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-hk-law/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md), find every term that deviates, and tell the lawyer what to do about each one — with specific redline language, not vague "consider revising."
The output is a review memo the lawyer can act on in one pass. Every issue has a severity, a business-impact explanation, a proposed fix, and an escalation call if one is needed.
Jurisdiction assumption
This review applies the team's positions from ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-hk-law/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md, which default to Hong Kong (HKSAR), England and Wales, and Singapore governing law unless the profile or contract says otherwise. If the agreement picks a different governing law, or the deal spans jurisdictions with statutory overrides (e.g., US state consumer rules, EU data-protection law, PDPO issues for HK data subjects), flag it — the analysis may not transfer as written.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 349 lines · 85 tokens per session scan A 9e7bdad04864
vendor-agreement-review 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 85 tokens to every session and 5,737 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
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…
employment-compliance
Covers the employment rules that carry real penalties — exempt and non-exempt classification, overtime and hours, employee versus contractor status, work authorization and recordkeeping, accommodation requests, and the notices and retention obligations that go with them. Use this to classify a role, review a…
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…