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 ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open --skill breach-multi-jurisdictiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-openWrote 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/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/breach-multi-jurisdiction)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/breach-multi-jurisdiction"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/breach-multi-jurisdiction/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/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/breach-multi-jurisdiction"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/breach-multi-jurisdiction.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 | $0.00091 | $0.02139 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.01069 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00428 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00214 |
Grade A, and why
breach-multi-jurisdiction 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 9d 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 — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Managing Multi-Jurisdiction Breach Notification
Overview
When a data breach affects individuals across multiple legal jurisdictions, the controller must navigate overlapping and sometimes conflicting notification requirements. The EU GDPR imposes a 72-hour supervisory authority notification deadline; US state laws impose varying timelines and content requirements; and other jurisdictions (Canada, Australia, Brazil, Japan, South Korea) have their own regimes. This skill provides the framework for coordinated notification across jurisdictions.
Jurisdiction Mapping — Notification Requirements
European Union — GDPR (All Member States)
| Element | Requirement |
|---|---|
| SA notification timeline | 72 hours from awareness (Art. 33(1)) |
| SA notification threshold | Unless breach is "unlikely to result in a risk" |
| DS notification timeline | Without undue delay when "high risk" (Art. 34(1)) |
| Lead SA determination | One-stop-shop: Art. 56 lead SA based on main establishment |
| Cross-border mechanism | Lead SA notified; other concerned SAs informed via Art. 60 |
| Content requirements | Art. 33(3)(a)-(d) for SA; Art. 34(2) for data subjects |
United States — State Breach Notification Laws
| State | Timeline | AG Notification | Threshold | Key Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | Most expedient time possible, no unreasonable delay | Yes, if 500+ CA residents | Name + specified data element | Substitute notice for 500,000+ affected; specific template for health data |
| New York | Most expedient time possible, no unreasonable delay | AG, DFS, DOCS simultaneously | Private information (name + data element) | SHIELD Act: 30-day AG notification for NY residents |
| Texas | 60 days from determination | AG if 250+ TX residents | Name + sensitive personal information | Expanded definition of sensitive data includes biometric identifiers |
| Florida | 30 days from determination | FDLE within 30 days if 500+ | Name + specified data element | One of the shortest statutory deadlines |
| Massachusetts | As soon as practicable | AG + OCABR simultaneously | Name + specified data element | Requires description of remedial services offered |
| Illinois | Most expedient time possible, no unreasonable delay | AG if 500+ IL residents | Name + specified data element | BIPA adds biometric data breach notification requirements |
| Virginia | 60 days from discovery | AG + affected individuals | Name + specified data element | VCDPA adds consumer data rights context |
| Colorado | 30 days from determination | AG within 30 days if 500+ | Name + specified data element | Among the shortest deadlines alongside Florida |
| Pennsylvania | Without unreasonable delay | AG if notifying | Name + specified data element | Broad definition of personal information |
| Washington | 30 days from discovery | AG within 30 days if 500+ | Name + specified data element | Biometric and health data included |
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 153 lines · 91 tokens per session scan A 457e9795b42c
breach-multi-jurisdiction is a skill published in the GitHub repository ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open (72 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 2,139 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
pia-generator
Generate structured privacy impact assessments so Claude can organize project privacy risks, controls, and decision points into a review-ready report.
audit-scope-checklist
Generate a scoped IT audit program with controls mapped to roles and compliance frameworks. Use this skill for audit planning, control checklist generation, and auditprogram.json creation.
compliance-checker
Compare system configuration evidence against common control frameworks and produce a concise compliance assessment with gaps and remediation priorities.
compliance-controls-playbook
Guide Claude through a structured compliance audit workflow covering framework selection, evidence planning, control testing, exception handling, and reporting.
evidence-tracker
Manage audit evidence requests, collection progress, and status reporting so Claude can keep audits organized and identify overdue or blocked evidence items.
consent-checker
Review privacy policy or notice text against common privacy frameworks so Claude can explain coverage gaps, strengths, and compliance priorities.