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 dpa-checklist-reviewgit 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/dpa-checklist-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/dpa-checklist-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/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/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/dpa-checklist-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/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 | $0.02695 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00059 | $0.01347 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00539 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00269 |
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 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.
This is a copy
94% identical to dpa-checklist-review — 44 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 — 168 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.
Inputs
The skill requires the document and the regulatory regime. If regime is not provided:
"Before I review, which regulatory regime should I check this DPA against?
- GDPR (EU/UK GDPR Article 28; covers any DPA processing EU/UK personal data)
- US state privacy (CCPA/CPRA, Virginia VCDPA, Colorado CPA, Connecticut CTDPA, Utah UCPA, Oregon OCPA, and similar)
- HIPAA BAA (Business Associate Agreement under US healthcare law)
- General commercial (DPA without a specific regime; checks commercially-standard DPA terms)
If multiple regimes apply, pick the most prescriptive (typically GDPR) for the primary review; we can run additional reviews for other regimes after."
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 · 168 lines · 117 tokens per session scan A 3c271002ccab
dpa-checklist-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open (72 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 117 tokens to every session and 2,695 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 94% identical to dpa-checklist-review, differing in 44 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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.