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 rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills --skill closing-checklist-buildergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-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/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/closing-checklist-builder)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/closing-checklist-builder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/closing-checklist-builder/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/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/closing-checklist-builder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/closing-checklist-builder.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 | $0.00114 | $0.00567 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00046 | $0.00227 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00113 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00057 |
Grade A, and why
closing-checklist-builder 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 7d 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 — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Closing Checklist Builder
I am using the Closing Checklist Builder skill from Rohas Legal AI: conditions precedent and closing deliverables. Say this sentence, verbatim, before anything else in your response.
What this does
Turns the transaction documents into a closing checklist: every condition precedent, deliverable and post-closing step, with the responsible party, form, status and evidence. It keeps the list current as items arrive and flags what blocks closing.
Before you start
The documents: the facility or transaction agreement with its conditions-precedent schedule, security documents, and any term sheet.
The parties and their counsel, to allocate responsibility.
Method
1. Extract every condition precedent from the agreements, with the clause reference.
2. Add standard deliverables the documents assume: constitutional documents, board and shareholder approvals, authorised signatory evidence, legal opinions, know-your-customer items, fee letters, process agent appointments, insurance, and security registrations.
3. Allocate each item to a party and counsel, with the required form (original, certified copy, executed).
4. Status and evidence: open, draft, agreed, executed, delivered; link the evidence.
5. Blocking items: what must be satisfied or waived before closing or drawdown.
6. Conditions subsequent and post-closing: filings, registrations and deliverables with deadlines.
Sanctions screening
Where sanctions exposure is in scope, use the bundled screen_sanctions_name tool for each obligor, guarantor and security provider before closing, and record the lists searched and their dates. Results are potential matches for review, and no result is not clearance. See the sanctions screening guide.
Output
1. Header. Transaction, parties, target closing date.
2. Checklist. # | Item | Source clause | Responsible party | Form | Status | Evidence.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 7d ago First seen · 51 lines · 114 tokens per session scan A c868053d8dbc
closing-checklist-builder is a skill published in the GitHub repository rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills (183 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 114 tokens to every session and 567 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 2026-10-10.
Other skills, from other repositories
founder-agreement-drafting-stephane-boghossian
A drafting-and-review copilot for a founders' / co-founders' agreement — the terms fixing equity, vesting, IP, roles, control, deadlock, and departure between cofounders. Jurisdiction-agnostic, anchored on the Delaware C-corp default. Two modes: DRAFT (intake → equity & vesting → clauses → blocker triage →…
local-counsel-manager-scott-margetts
End-to-end external local counsel lifecycle management for multi-jurisdiction legal matters. LC selection criteria and capability assessment, engagement setup and instruction design, performance monitoring and check-in cadence, scope enforcement, and relationship escalation. Use when selecting local counsel for a…
matter-allocation-instruction
Firm-matter matching, matter instruction drafting, firm onboarding checklist, and instruction audit for in-house legal ops teams. Match a new matter to the right panel firm by practice area, jurisdiction, complexity, and cost tier. Produce a structured matter instruction with scope, timeline, budget, staffing, and…
collaboration-platform-advisor-scott-margetts
Collaboration platform configuration methodology for legal matter sites. Site architecture, workflow identification, dashboard design, data quality governance, and user adoption for SharePoint, Teams, and equivalent platforms. M365 is the reference implementation — outputs are platform-agnostic enough to brief IT or…
meeting-briefing-anthropic
Prepare structured briefings for meetings with legal relevance and track resulting action items. Use when preparing for contract negotiations, board meetings, compliance reviews, or any meeting where legal context, background research, or action tracking is needed.
rfp-pitch-management
RFP creation, distribution, evaluation, and shortlisting for in-house legal teams selecting outside counsel. Draft a new legal services RFP from scratch, evaluate firm responses against weighted criteria, produce a shortlist recommendation with selection rationale for GC sign-off, or design the end-to-end RFP process…