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 templated-legal-responsegit 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/templated-legal-response)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/templated-legal-response"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/templated-legal-response/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/templated-legal-response"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/templated-legal-response.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 | $0.00046 | $0.02122 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01061 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00424 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00212 |
Grade A, and why
Templated Legal Response 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 — 126 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Templated Legal Response
Purpose
Produce a draft response to a routine, recurring legal inquiry using a configured response template, and run an escalation gate before drafting so that matters needing individualized attention do not receive a templated reply. The skill covers common in-house inquiries: data subject requests, litigation hold notices, vendor legal questions, NDA requests from business teams, privacy inquiries, subpoena acknowledgments, and insurance notifications.
This skill provides workflow discipline and structure. It produces draft legal work product for attorney review. This is not legal advice. A templated response is still a legal communication and must be reviewed before it is sent.
Use When
- A user says "draft a response to this data subject request," "respond to this vendor legal question," "send a litigation hold notice," or names another recurring inquiry type.
- A recurring inquiry arrives that the legal team normally handles with a standard template.
- The team needs a consistent first draft together with a check on whether the matter is routine enough to be templated at all.
Required Inputs
- The inquiry and its type — data subject request, litigation hold, vendor question, NDA request, privacy inquiry, subpoena, insurance notification, or another recurring category. If the type is unclear, ask before drafting.
- The team's response template for that inquiry type, if one exists — the actual firm template. If none exists, the skill drafts a default structure and flags clearly that no approved template was used.
- Customization facts: names, dates, reference numbers, the applicable jurisdiction and regulation, the date the inquiry was received, and the response deadline if known.
- The audience and relationship — internal or external, business or legal, individual or regulator, routine or contentious — so tone can be set.
This skill drafts a response; it does not send anything.
Do Not Use When
- The inquiry is a subpoena, regulator demand, or other legal process — these require individualized counsel review; the skill may produce only a draft clearly marked for counsel, never a final response.
- An escalation trigger is present (see the Workflow) — the templated path stops and the skill produces a counsel-review draft instead.
- The task is to draft a substantive legal position or argument — that is not a templated response; route it to an attorney.
- No inquiry has been provided and the request is to design templates in the abstract — agree scope first.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 126 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 07fcb0c8acd5
Templated Legal Response is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 2,122 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
contingencia-report
Gera relatórios estruturados de contingência jurídica para uso em balanços, auditoria e compliance. Use quando o usuário precisar classificar processos por probabilidade de perda (provável/possível/remota) conforme CPC art. 95-96 e IAS 37 / CPC 25, calcular impacto financeiro no passivo contingente, ou preparar…
contrato-review
Analisa contratos brasileiros identificando cláusulas problemáticas, riscos jurídicos e oportunidades de negociação. Use quando precisar fazer due diligence contratual, revisar minutas antes de assinatura, identificar cláusulas abusivas ou desequilibradas, verificar conformidade com CC/2002, CDC, LGPD ou legislação…
audiencia-classifier
Classifica publicações de audiência judicial por tipo e modalidade. Use quando receber textos de intimações, pautas de audiência ou publicações do diário de justiça e precisar categorizar automaticamente em INICIAL/INSTRUÇÃO/JULGAMENTO/CONCILIAÇÃO × PRESENCIAL/VIRTUAL/HÍBRIDA. Aplicável a publicações de qualquer…
Geração de RIPD (Relatório de Impacto à Proteção de Dados)
Gera o Relatório de Impacto à Proteção de Dados Pessoais (RIPD) conforme exigido pela LGPD (Art. 38), descrevendo o tratamento, identificando riscos, propondo medidas de mitigação e documentando a base legal aplicável.
Triagem e Resposta a Solicitações de Titulares (LGPD)
Classifica solicitações de titulares de dados pessoais recebidas pelo canal de privacidade, verifica prazo legal de resposta, identifica o direito exercido (Art. 18 LGPD) e gera minuta de resposta formal adequada ao pedido.
cnj-parser
Valida, normaliza e extrai componentes de números de processos judiciais brasileiros no formato CNJ (NNNNNNN-DD.AAAA.J.TT.OOOO). Use quando receber números de processo em formatos variados (com ou sem máscara, colados de sistemas diferentes), precisar validar dígitos verificadores, identificar tribunal, instância e…