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 LegalQuants/lq-ai --skill contract-qagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LegalQuants/lq-aiWrote 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/legalquants/lq-ai/contract-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/legalquants/lq-ai/contract-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/legalquants/lq-ai/contract-qa/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/legalquants/lq-ai/contract-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/legalquants/lq-ai/contract-qa.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- 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 | $0.00131 | $0.03442 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00052 | $0.01377 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00688 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00344 |
Grade A, and why
contract-qa 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 265 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Contract QA
Answer the user's specific question about a loaded contract. The answer is precise, cited to the document, and shaped by the question — not by a fixed template.
This skill handles question-driven inquiry against a single contract. It is the right skill when the user has a specific question and wants a specific answer. It is the wrong skill when the user wants a comprehensive review of a contract — for that, route to the appropriate review skill (NDA Review, DPA Checklist Review, MSA-SaaS Review, etc.).
When this skill applies
Apply when:
- The user has loaded a contract and asks a specific question about its content.
- The user asks "where" something is addressed in the contract.
- The user asks whether a clause is unusual, standard, or aggressive.
- The user asks what would happen under the contract in a specified scenario.
- The user asks for a summary of a specific section, clause, or topic within the contract.
Do not apply when:
- The user asks for a full review or risk assessment of the contract — route to the appropriate review skill.
- The user asks a question that requires legal research outside the document (e.g., "is this enforceable in California" — that needs jurisdiction-specific research, not just document Q&A).
- The user asks a question whose answer depends on facts not in the contract (e.g., "did we breach this" — that depends on facts the skill does not have).
- The user asks for legal opinion (e.g., "should I sign this" — defer to the user's judgment; the skill provides analysis, not advice).
- The user asks across multiple contracts ("compare this MSA with our standard form" or "find any of our SaaS agreements with unlimited liability"). This is multi-document Q&A; deferred to v2.
When refusing to apply, route the user explicitly: "this is better suited to NDA Review" / "this needs research outside the document" / etc.
Inputs
The skill requires the document and the question. If the user has a contract loaded but no specific question, ask:
What ships with it
13 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
- acceptance/fixtures/comparison-liability.md 3.0 KB
- acceptance/fixtures/lookup-termination.md 3.2 KB
- acceptance/fixtures/scenario-late-payment.md 2.9 KB
- acceptance/snapshots/comparison-liability.golden.json 1.1 KB
- acceptance/snapshots/lookup-termination.golden.json 964 B
- acceptance/snapshots/scenario-late-payment.golden.json 1.0 KB
- examples/example_type_a_lookup.md 4.0 KB
- examples/example_type_c_unusualness.md 6.3 KB
- examples/example_type_d_scenario.md 8.1 KB
- examples/example_type_e_multi_issue.md 12 KB
- reference/citation_format.md 7.1 KB
- reference/question_classification.md 9.6 KB
- test-plan.md 13 KB
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 · 265 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A 9a7fa2522bfb
contract-qa is a skill published in the GitHub repository LegalQuants/lq-ai (156 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 131 tokens to every session and 3,442 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
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…