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 matter-intakegit 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/matter-intake)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/matter-intake"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/matter-intake/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/matter-intake"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/matter-intake.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 | $0.00043 | $0.01888 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00944 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00378 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00189 |
Grade A, and why
Family Law Matter Intake 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 — 111 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Family Law Matter Intake
Purpose
Capture the facts of a new family law matter — divorce or dissolution, custody and parenting, support, property and debt, or a related dispute — into a structured intake summary, an issue map, a missing-facts list, a document request list, and safety/escalation flags, so a qualified, licensed attorney has an organized starting point. This skill organizes what the user provides; it gives no family-law advice, recommends no strategy, and reaches no conclusion.
Use When
- A new family law matter must be captured in a structured, reviewable form for an attorney.
- A user describes a divorce, custody, support, or property dispute and a first-pass organization of the facts and issues is needed.
- An attorney wants an issue map and a document request list before a client meeting.
Required Inputs
- The parties and their roles (for example, the user's client and the other party) — or
not provided. - The relationship or marriage status, and the matter type (divorce/dissolution, custody/parenting, support, property/debt, modification, enforcement, or other) — or
not provided. - The case stage (pre-filing, filed, pending, post-judgment, modification, appeal, or other) — or
not provided. - The jurisdiction and governing law — or
not provided, flagged[verify jurisdiction]. - Whether children are involved, and any existing orders (custody, support, protective, or other) — or
not provided. - The financial, property/debt, support, custody/parenting, and safety concerns the user wishes to raise — or
not provided. - Source references to any pleadings, orders, correspondence, or records provided.
- Any dates the user supplies, echoed verbatim and marked
[deadline verification required].
If the parties, the matter type, the case stage, or the jurisdiction is missing, record it as not provided and return the missing-information list first. Do not assume a default.
Do Not Use When
- The request is for legal advice, a custody recommendation, a support figure, or a litigation strategy.
- The request is to compute a deadline or to decide what or where to file.
- A single document must be reviewed in depth (use
settlement-agreement-issue-spotterorcustody-order-review-checklist). - The matter is solely a safety concern — start with
domestic-violence-safety-referral-checklist.
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 · 111 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A eb8790ef7bb6
Family Law Matter Intake is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 1,888 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
cross-check-legal-advice
Use AI for legal issue-spotting, plain-language clause explanations, and questions to verify with licensed counsel.
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.
fedramp
Expert guidance for FedRAMP certification and compliance under CR26 (FedRAMP Consolidated Rules for 2026). Use this skill whenever a user asks about FedRAMP authorization, ATO (Authority to Operate), cloud security for federal government, NIST SP 800-53 controls, CSP compliance, or any of the core FedRAMP document…
eu-cra
Expert EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) advisor for Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 — mandatory cybersecurity and vulnerability handling requirements for all products with digital elements (PDEs) sold in the EU. Use this skill for gap analysis, product classification (Default / Class I / Class II), conformity assessment route…