disciplinary-documenter

disciplinary-documenter is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills. It costs 48 tokens per session (680 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A workplace-process tool for creating a fair, traceable record of a disciplinary case, from an allegation through a decision and appeal. It can cover notices, hearings, findings, sanctions, suspensions, and the full case file.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to prepare disciplinary documents based on the applicable workplace rules, allegations, evidence, deadlines, representation rights, decision authority, and procedural stage.
Why use it?
It helps employers follow the correct procedure, avoid assuming guilt in advance, and preserve a clear record of who investigated, decided, and heard any appeal.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for Claude Code and Codex: shipped in a Claude Code plugin, but also agents/openai.yaml present.

Part of the rohas-legal-ai plugin — 149 skills shipped together

Good fit Use it to prepare disciplinary documents based on the applicable workplace rules, allegations, evidence, deadlines, representation rights, decision authority, and procedural stage.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills --skill disciplinary-documenter
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install rohas-legal-ai, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 149 skills.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for disciplinary-documenter

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for disciplinary-documenter

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills/disciplinary-documenter.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 48 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 680 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00048 $0.00680
Opus 5 $0.00024 $0.00340
Sonnet 5 $0.00010 $0.00136
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00068

Measured 13d ago against content hash 6f47970bf4a5, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

disciplinary-documenter 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 13d 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.

plugins/rohas-legal-ai/skills/disciplinary-documenter/SKILL.md · 46 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 46 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Disciplinary Documenter

I am using the Disciplinary Documenter skill from Rohas Legal AI: the paper trail for a disciplinary proceeding. Say this sentence, verbatim, before anything else in your response.

Create a procedurally fair record without predetermining guilt. Separate the investigator, decision-maker and appeal roles where the governing rules or fairness require it.

Required inputs

  • Jurisdiction, employing entity, work location and worker status
  • Contract, collective agreement, standing orders, service rules and policies
  • Allegations, dates, known evidence and prior related action
  • Applicable statutory, regulatory or public-sector procedure
  • Decision authority, representation rights and live deadlines
  • Requested document, procedural stage and contemplated interim measures

Identify missing source documents and assumptions before drafting.

Method

  1. Map authority and procedure. Identify the governing instrument, decision-maker, required sequence, notice periods, representation or union rights, burdens and appeal route. Verify current law and rules.
  2. Define each allegation. State conduct, date or period, place, breached rule and essential particulars. Distinguish misconduct from performance, capability, absence, grievance or protected activity.
  3. Preserve evidence. Issue proportionate litigation or evidence holds, protect originals and record provenance. Do not access private accounts or devices without lawful authority.
  4. Assess interim action. Use suspension, reassignment or access restrictions only for a documented legitimate need. State pay, benefits, review date and that the measure is not a finding.
  5. Give a fair opportunity. Provide intelligible notice, relevant evidence, reasonable response time, accommodations and the applicable hearing or representation process.
  6. Record the hearing. Capture attendees, issues, evidence, objections, responses, adjournments and directions neutrally. Do not replace evidence with conclusory minutes.
  7. Make findings element by element. Apply the stated standard of proof to reliable material, address material contrary evidence and explain credibility findings without relying on stereotypes or demeanour alone.
  8. Select proportionate action. Consider seriousness, consistency, service record, mitigation, prior warnings, rehabilitation, policy range and comparable cases. Avoid double punishment.
  9. Close and review. Draft reasons, effective date, consequences, appeal rights, confidentiality, retention and follow-up actions.

Read the full file on GitHub · 46 lines

Files

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.

Changes

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.

  1. 13d ago First seen · 46 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 6f47970bf4a5

Subscribe to this mod's changes

disciplinary-documenter is a skill published in the GitHub repository rohasnagpal/legal-ai-skills (88 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 680 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

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.

wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep · 49 tokens

regulatory-research-fallback

Fallback workflow for regulatory research when web extraction tools fail on government PDFs.

HKUDS/OpenSpace · 20 tokens

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.

x-cmd/x-cmd · 57 tokens

gesellschaftsrechtliche-satzungen-agb

Für Gesellschaftsrechtliche Satzungen AGB Abgrenzung: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: gesellschaftsrechtliche-satzungen-agb.

Klotzkette/claude-fuer-deutsches-recht · 69 tokens

memstack-business-gdpr

Use this skill when the user says 'GDPR', 'data protection', 'privacy compliance', 'DPA', 'DSAR', 'data subject request', 'cookie consent', 'privacy audit', 'CCPA', or asks 'do I need GDPR for this repo'. Scans the repository to detect what personal data is collected, classifies sensitivity, determines whether GDPR…

cwinvestments/memstack · 121 tokens

nda-review

Use when the user uploads or pastes a non-disclosure agreement and asks for review, redline, risk assessment, or a recommendation on whether to sign. Identifies missing standard protections, one-sided or unusual provisions, and operational issues; produces a structured report with severity ratings and citations to…

LegalQuants/lq-ai · 79 tokens