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 zgbrenner/agentcounsel --skill contract-risk-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zgbrenner/agentcounselWrote 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/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/contract-risk-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/contract-risk-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/contract-risk-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/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/contract-risk-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/contract-risk-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 | $0.00044 | $0.04411 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.02205 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00882 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00441 |
Grade A, and why
Contract Risk 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 11d 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 — 182 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Contract Risk Review
Purpose
Produce a structured, attorney-ready risk review of a commercial contract. This skill applies to master services agreements (MSAs), vendor and supplier agreements, professional services agreements, software licenses, and similar commercial instruments. It identifies and assesses risk across standard clause categories, produces a completed risk matrix, and surfaces issues requiring attorney attention before the contract is executed, modified, or relied upon.
This skill produces draft legal work product for attorney review only. It is not legal advice and does not constitute a final negotiating position.
Use When
- A user asks to "review this contract," "flag the risks in this agreement," "what should I push back on," or "is this MSA standard."
- A vendor, supplier, or service provider has sent a contract and the client needs a first-pass review before negotiation or execution.
- The user is preparing to redline a commercial agreement and needs a structured starting point.
- A contract is being renewed or amended and the user wants to understand baseline risk exposure.
- An in-house team or business owner needs a risk summary before escalating to outside counsel.
- The user needs to compare risk posture across multiple inbound form agreements.
Required Inputs
- The full contract text — uploaded or pasted. Do not review from a description, summary, or excerpt alone; the full document is required.
- The client's role — which party is the client (e.g., customer/buyer, vendor/service provider, licensor, licensee)?
- Business context — what is the commercial relationship, what is being provided or received, and what is the approximate transaction value or risk exposure?
- Counterparty form or negotiated draft — note whether this is the counterparty's standard form (higher scrutiny) or a negotiated draft.
- Optional: the practice group's
practice-profiles/contracts.mdif it has been populated and is loaded alongside this skill. If present, the skill uses its Standard Positions and Escalation Thresholds tables to benchmark the output and to gate escalation. If absent, the skill proceeds without practice-profile benchmarking and asks the user to supply standing positions inline if needed.
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.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 182 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 20b0347e1e20
Contract Risk Review is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 4,411 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
legal-research
A legal research skill for finding and analysing laws and court cases, including similar cases. It requires access to a reliable legal research database before producing a formal report.
document-fill
A document-filling assistant that uses a supplied template and case files to fill in forms, contracts, or legal documents. It also reports where each filled value came from and which details are missing.
contract-review
A contract-review workflow for agreements governed by Chinese law, United States law, or both. It examines clauses one by one and produces a list of legal-risk questions, with an optional marked-up Word document.
legaltech-expert
Expert in legal technology: contract lifecycle management, e-discovery, AI-assisted legal research, case and matter management, document automation, and compliance tooling. Use when the user mentions legal case or matter management, e-discovery and legal holds, CLM or contract review and obligation tracking, legal…
cross-check-legal-advice
Use AI for legal issue-spotting, plain-language clause explanations, and questions to verify with licensed counsel.
redline-sentry
Review NDAs, MSAs, DPAs, SaaS agreements, and other procurement contracts against a configurable risk playbook. Use whenever the user drops a contract file (PDF, DOCX) and asks to redline, review, summarise risk, check clauses, or "what would procurement say". Trigger on phrases like "review this NDA", "redline this…