What is privilege-log-review-zhou210712?

A first-pass review process for checking an evidence list under Chinese civil procedure. It considers authenticity, lawful collection, and relevance, then marks uncertain items for a lawyer.

It is for reviewing documents, recordings, copies, witness statements, and other evidence before questioning or challenging evidence in court.

It helps separate clearly acceptable or clearly problematic evidence from issues that need professional judgment. This reduces the time lawyers spend on routine screening while keeping uncertain decisions for review.

privilege-log-review-zhou210712 — Skill for Claude Code and Codex by T

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 ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open --skill privilege-log-review-zhou210712

Clone the repo

git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

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.

README.md

[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/privilege-log-review-zhou210712/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/privilege-log-review-zhou210712)

Your own site

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/privilege-log-review-zhou210712"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/privilege-log-review-zhou210712/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.

Your own site · 80×15

<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/privilege-log-review-zhou210712"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/privilege-log-review-zhou210712.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>

Per session 96 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.

When invoked 1,753 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.

Origin 86% copy Near-identical to another mod 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.

Model	Per session	Once invoked
Fable 5.1	$0.00096	$0.01753
Opus 5	$0.00048	$0.00877
Sonnet 5	$0.00019	$0.00351
Haiku 4.5	$0.00010	$0.00175

Measured 9d ago against content hash 7895f7c652cb, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

privilege-log-review-zhou210712 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.

Origin

This is a copy

86% identical to privilege-log-review — 18 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.

cn/litigation/skills/privilege-log-review-zhou210712/SKILL.md · 161 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 161 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

/privilege-log-review

加载 ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md → 审查规程。
遵循以下工作流和参考材料。
对每个条目：明显可采 / 明显不可采 / 需要律师审查。标记理由。
输出：附带标记的已审查证据清单。律师在质证前审查所有标记。

证据三性审查

目的

证据审查有三种条目：明显具有可采性的、明显不具有可采性的、以及需要判断的。本技能筛查前两种，使律师的时间完全用于第三种。

这是首轮审查。律师审查每个标记。无例外。

中国法下的证据审查框架

中国民事诉讼中，证据审查的核心是三性审查：

真实性——证据是否为原件/原物，或经核对无误的复制件/复制品
合法性——证据的来源和形式是否符合法律规定
关联性——证据是否与待证事实相关

法律依据：

《民事诉讼法》第66条（证据种类）[法条原文]
《民事诉讼法》司法解释第104-106条（证据审查与非法证据排除）[法条原文]
《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》[法条原文]

非法证据排除（《民事诉讼法》司法解释第106条）： 对以严重侵害他人合法权益、违反法律禁止性规定或者严重违背公序良俗的方法形成或者获取的证据，不得作为认定案件事实的根据。[法条原文]

加载上下文

~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md → 审查规程。

判断

三态规则。本技能绝不沉默地决定主观性判断标准不满足。 在任何不确定的判断上——合法性存疑、关联性边界模糊——技能保留"待审查"标记并添加 ⚠️ 标记给律师。错误地标记为可采是单向门；过度标记由律师在审查中纠正（双向门）。倾向可恢复的错误。

明显可采（✅）——保留，不标记

原件或经核对的与原件一致的复制件
来源合法、形式合规的证据
与待证事实直接相关
在举证期限内提交

不确定——保留但标记（✅ + ⚠️）

以下为默认情况。技能不基于自己的主观判断排除证据。示例：

复印件无法与原件核对——真实性存疑。保留；标记律师判断。
未经对方同意制作的录音录像——未严重侵害他人合法权益或违反法律禁止性规定的可能可采。保留；标记律师判断。
关联性边界模糊——可能相关也可能无关。保留；标记。
逾期提交的证据——是否构成"因客观原因逾期"或"对方无异议"？《民事诉讼法》第65条 [法条原文]。保留；标记律师判断。
证人证言中的传闻——证明力判断而非可采性判断。保留；标记。

每个标记记录具体的开放问题和证据的两面，使律师无需从头阅读即可决定。

明显不可采（❌）——建议排除，但标注评估理由

以严重侵害他人合法权益方法获取
以违反法律禁止性规定方法获取
与待证事实完全无关
经鉴定确认的伪造证据

如果任何一项是临界的——录制内容是否构成严重侵害——则属于不确定，不是❌。

工作流

步骤1：格式检查

证据清单是否包含必要字段？

字段	有无？
编号
证据名称
证据来源
证明内容
证据形式（书证/物证/电子数据/证人证言等）
是否为原件/原物

缺失字段 → 标记需在实质性审查前补全。

步骤2：逐项审查

对于每个条目：

条目[N]：[✅ 可采 | ✅ + ⚠️ 保留 & 标记 | ❌ 建议排除]
[如✅：一行理由]
[如✅ + ⚠️：保留；律师需要回答的具体问题；两面证据]
[如❌：一行理由——但条目保留在清单上直到律师决定移除]

步骤3：模式标记

跨整个清单：

同一问题重复出现？
过度提交证据的模式？
证明内容描述模糊？

输出

[工作成果标题]

## 证据三性审查：[案件] — [日期]

**适用规则：** 《民事诉讼法》第66条、第65条 `[法条原文]` + 司法解释第104-106条 `[法条原文]`
**已审查条目：** [N]
**结果：** [N] ✅ 可采 / [N] ✅+⚠️ 保留并标记 / [N] ❌ 建议排除

### ✅ + ⚠️ 已标记 —— 律师决定

| 条目 | 证据编号 | 问题 | 支持可采 | 反对可采 | 待判断 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|

### ❌ 建议排除（律师确认后移除）

| 条目 | 证据编号 | 理由 |
|---|---|---|

### ✅ 可采（无需行动）

[计数。可按需提供列表。]

### 模式观察

[重复问题、过度提交、描述问题]

---

**律师必须在任何行动前审查所有 ⚠️ 和 ❌。**

Read the full file on GitHub · 161 lines

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.

9d ago First seen · 161 lines · 96 tokens per session scan A 7895f7c652cb

Subscribe to this mod's changes

privilege-log-review-zhou210712 is a skill published in the GitHub repository ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open (72 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 96 tokens to every session and 1,753 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to privilege-log-review, differing in 18 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Claude Code Legal and compliance ai-agents anthropic-skills claude-skills compliance contract-analysis

privilege-log-review-zhou210712