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 psa-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/psa-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/psa-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/psa-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/psa-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/psa-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 | $0.00034 | $0.04095 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.02048 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00819 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00409 |
Grade A, and why
Purchase and Sale Agreement 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 6d 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 — 319 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purchase and Sale Agreement Review
Purpose
Produce a structured, attorney-ready issue-spotting review of a real estate purchase and sale agreement (PSA) from a single party's perspective. This skill reads the agreement clause by clause, identifies the risks the agreement creates for the reviewing party, organizes those risks into a risk matrix across the standard PSA categories, and delivers a prioritized issue list and a key-dates table for an attorney to verify before negotiation, signing, or closing.
This skill produces draft work product for attorney review only. It is not legal advice and does not constitute a final negotiating position or a recommendation to sign or close. The agreement itself, and the reviewing attorney's judgment, always control.
Use When
- A user asks to "review this PSA," "review this purchase agreement," "flag the risks in this real estate contract," or "what should I push back on" in a property purchase or sale.
- A buyer, seller, or lender needs a first-pass issue-spotting review of a PSA before negotiation, signing, or closing.
- The user is preparing to redline a PSA and needs a structured, prioritized starting point.
- A PSA is being amended or assigned and the user wants to understand baseline risk exposure from one party's perspective.
Required Inputs
- The full purchase and sale agreement — uploaded or pasted. Do not review from a description, a partial excerpt, or a prior summary.
- The review perspective — which party the review is for: buyer, seller, or lender. The same agreement reads differently from each, so the perspective must be stated before substantive work begins.
- The property type — for example raw land, single-tenant retail, office, industrial, multifamily, condominium, or a portfolio.
- The transaction posture — for example an arm's-length sale, a distressed or short sale, a 1031 exchange leg, an entity or membership-interest deal, a sale-leaseback, or an assignment of contract — and the stage the deal is at.
- The jurisdiction — the state (and, where relevant, the county or municipality) where the property sits. Record it; do not assume a default.
- The document set — every amendment, addendum, exhibit, side letter, escrow instruction, and title commitment that exists. If the PSA references documents that were not provided, note them as missing.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 319 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 2c0317a083c6
Purchase and Sale Agreement Review is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 4,095 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
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.
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…
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…