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-skills --skill dpa-checklist-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LegalQuants/lq-skillsWrote 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-skills/dpa-checklist-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/legalquants/lq-skills/dpa-checklist-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/legalquants/lq-skills/dpa-checklist-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/legalquants/lq-skills/dpa-checklist-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/legalquants/lq-skills/dpa-checklist-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 | $0.00117 | $0.03992 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00047 | $0.01597 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00798 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00399 |
Grade A, and why
dpa-checklist-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 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.
This is a copy
89% identical to dpa-checklist-review — 36 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 — 218 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
DPA Checklist Review
Conduct a structured compliance review of a Data Processing Agreement, DPA-equivalent addendum, or Business Associate Agreement against the requirements of the applicable regulatory regime. The output is a checklist suitable for a compliance tracker — each required term has a row, an assessment, and a clause reference.
When this skill applies
Apply when the user provides a DPA, DPA addendum, or BAA and asks for compliance review against a specific regulatory regime. The skill works against four distinct regimes (see regulatory_regime input) and applies different requirements for each.
Do not apply this skill to:
- Privacy policies. Those are public-facing notices, not contracts; different review skill needed.
- Standalone privacy schedules or security exhibits inside larger agreements where the privacy/security terms have not been collected into a DPA structure. Tell the user the substantive privacy and security terms need to be pulled into a DPA-shaped structure before this skill is useful.
- Contractual privacy clauses inside MSAs that have not been broken out as a DPA addendum. Recommend the user request a separate DPA addendum from the counterparty, which is now industry standard.
- Cross-regime analysis (e.g., "is this GDPR-compliant and HIPAA-compliant?"). Run the skill twice with different
regulatory_regimevalues and compare outputs.
Privilege and confidentiality
DPAs and BAAs frequently contain client-confidential information (data flows, security postures, vendor relationships, deal terms) and the resulting compliance review is plausibly attorney work product. Before running the skill, the user must confirm:
- Privileged work product. The checklist produced by this skill is a draft work product intended to support legal advice. Treat the output as presumptively privileged where applicable, and do not distribute it outside the attorney-client circle without considering waiver consequences.
- External-model exposure. If this skill is being executed in an environment that routes the document to a model or service outside the user's attorney-supervised workflow (e.g., a non-BAA-covered API, a non-enterprise consumer endpoint, a logged training surface), confirm with the user before proceeding. Run this skill only inside an attorney-supervised workflow where the routing and retention posture has been vetted.
- Legal-use posture. Output is a draft for review by qualified privacy counsel — it is not a legal opinion, not a regulator-facing artifact, and not a substitute for a PIA, TIA, or other formal compliance assessment (see "What this skill does not do").
What ships with it
7 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.
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 · 218 lines · 117 tokens per session scan A 4dd9822f9a6a
dpa-checklist-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository LegalQuants/lq-skills (64 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 117 tokens to every session and 3,992 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to dpa-checklist-review, differing in 36 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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…