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 recht-review-momarcode1git 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/recht-review-momarcode1)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/recht-review-momarcode1"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/recht-review-momarcode1/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/recht-review-momarcode1"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thomasmoreai/legal-skills-open/recht-review-momarcode1.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 | $0.00054 | $0.02494 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00998 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00499 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00249 |
Grade A, and why
recht-review-momarcode1 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 24d 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 — 266 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/recht review — Vertragsprüfung (Full Review)
When the user triggers this skill, follow these steps exactly.
Step 1: Read the Document
Read the entire uploaded document. If it's a PDF, extract all text. If it's a DOCX, parse it. If no document is uploaded, ask the user to provide one.
Do NOT begin analysis until you have read the full document.
Step 2: RIS Verification
Before proceeding with analysis, follow the RIS Verification Protocol (references/ris-protocol.md):
- Check RIS MCP availability
- For every § you cite in this analysis, verify current wording via RIS
- For case law references, retrieve via RIS Justiz
- Record verification status for the Quellenstatus block
- If RIS is unavailable, follow the fallback ladder and flag all affected citations
Step 3: Ask Clarifying Questions (only if needed)
Before analysis, you MUST know these three things. Check the document first — often you can infer them. Only ask if truly unclear:
-
Which party is the user? Look at the document context. If unclear, ask:
"Welche Vertragspartei sind Sie? (z.B. Käufer/Verkäufer, Mieter/Vermieter, Arbeitnehmer/Arbeitgeber)"
-
Is this B2B or B2C? This determines if KSchG applies. Check if one party is clearly a consumer (natürliche Person, kein Unternehmer). If unclear, ask.
-
What is the approximate contract value (Streitwert)? Often stated in the contract. If not, ask.
Step 4: Classify the Document
Determine the contract type. This controls which legal framework applies:
- Kaufvertrag → §§1053ff ABGB, check Gewährleistung §§922ff
- Werkvertrag → §§1151ff ABGB (Werk), check Abnahme, Gewährleistung
- Mietvertrag → Check if MRG applies (§1 MRG). If yes: MRG controls. If no: ABGB §§1090ff
- Dienstvertrag / Arbeitsvertrag → AngG, ArbVG, applicable KollV, AZG, UrlG
- GmbH-Vertrag / Gesellschaftervereinbarung → GmbHG, §§3-5 (notwendiger Inhalt)
- NDA / Geheimhaltungsvereinbarung → ABGB allgemein, UWG §11
- Lizenzvertrag → UrhG or PatG + ABGB
- AGB → §864a ABGB, §879 Abs 3, KSchG §§6,9
- Freier Dienstvertrag → Check if disguised Arbeitsvertrag (§539a ASVG)
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 24d ago Changed · +3 lines faf9556b6b77
- 26d ago First seen · 263 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A fe0be90b2678
recht-review-momarcode1 is a skill published in the GitHub repository ThomasMoreAI/legal-skills-open (95 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 2,494 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-10-02.
Other skills, from other repositories
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…