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-ai-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-ai-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/vendor-ai-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/vendor-ai-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-ai-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/buildwise-studios/claude-for-hk-law/vendor-ai-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 | $0.00087 | $0.04775 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00044 | $0.02388 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00955 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00477 |
Grade A, and why
vendor-ai-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.
This is a copy
86% identical to vendor-ai-review — 30 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 — 324 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/vendor-ai-review
- Read
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-hk-law/ai-governance-legal/CLAUDE.md. Confirm vendor governance positions are populated — if not, stop and direct to setup. - Use the framework below.
- Confirm document type (AI addendum / main agreement AI provisions / ToS). If only an AUP was provided, ask for the full terms.
- Term-by-term review: training on data, confidentiality of inputs, model changes, output IP, liability, incident notification, human review rights, use restrictions, audit rights.
- AI addendum gap check if DPA exists but no AI addendum.
- AI policy consistency diff vs.
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-hk-law/ai-governance-legal/CLAUDE.md. - Output: bottom line, term-by-term, recommended redlines, if-they-won't-move routing.
/ai-governance-legal:vendor-ai-review openai-enterprise-agreement.pdf
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 /ai-governance-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/ai-governance-legal/matters/<matter-slug>/. Never read another matter's files unless Cross-matter context is on.
Purpose
Vendor AI terms are where your governance positions actually get tested. The cold-start interview captures what you want. This skill checks what you agreed to — and flags the gaps between those two things.
The direction here is always the same: we are the deployer or buyer reviewing the vendor's terms. This is the opposite posture from the DPA review controller/processor question — there's no flip.
What varies is the input:
- A standalone AI agreement or AI addendum (most structured)
- A vendor's universal terms of service with AI provisions embedded (often buried)
- An acceptable use policy (tells you what you can't do; says nothing about what the vendor can do with your data or outputs)
- A combination — master agreement + DPA + AI addendum (common for serious enterprise AI vendors)
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 · 324 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A 3acbc6b1ce2e
vendor-ai-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 87 tokens to every session and 4,775 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to vendor-ai-review, differing in 30 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
aia-generation
Run an AI impact assessment — structured intake, risk analysis, UK regulatory classification (UK GDPR / DPA 2018, ICO AI guidance, sector-specific UK regulation), EU AI Act analysis where EU nexus exists, policy consistency diff, and recommendation with conditions. Uses the house-style structure learned from the seed…
litigation-knowledge-base
A knowledge-management system for litigation work. It organizes public legal research, private case notes, and private work notes, and can search across connected knowledge bases.
legal-kb-builder
A tool for turning legal documents and other source material into a searchable local knowledge base. It supports sources such as PDF, DOCX, images, Markdown, and question-and-answer sets.
ai-inventory
Per-system AI inventory — track each AI system's EU AI Act role and risk tier (where EU nexus exists), UK regulatory flags (ICO DPIA trigger, CMA, FCA model risk, MHRA, Ofcom), and UK GDPR Art. 22 automated decision-making status. Role and tier are assessed per system, not per company. Use when the user says "ai…
ingest-emails
Ingest emails from an IMAP mailbox into the legal RAG pipeline. Use when the user wants to add emails to the search index.
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…