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 vendor-agreement-statusgit 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/vendor-agreement-status)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/vendor-agreement-status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/vendor-agreement-status/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/vendor-agreement-status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zgbrenner/agentcounsel/vendor-agreement-status.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 | $0.00047 | $0.02117 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01059 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00423 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00212 |
Grade A, and why
Vendor Agreement Status 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 — 139 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Vendor Agreement Status
Purpose
Produce a structured, attorney-ready draft status report of the agreements in place with a given vendor. The skill inventories the agreement records provided, reports the apparent status of each, runs a gap analysis against the agreement types the firm expects for a vendor of that kind, and flags upcoming dates and surviving obligations.
This skill provides workflow discipline and structure. It produces draft legal work product for attorney review. This is not legal advice, and a status report is not a legal opinion on the enforceability of any agreement or the adequacy of coverage.
Use When
- A user says "what agreements do we have with this vendor?", "pull the vendor agreement status," or "consolidate everything we have with this supplier."
- A renewal, a new engagement, or a vendor risk review is approaching and the team needs a consolidated view.
- The user needs a gap analysis showing which expected agreements with a vendor are missing.
Required Inputs
- Vendor identity: the vendor's name, including known name variations, abbreviations, and any parent-or-subsidiary relationships that affect which entity contracted.
- Agreement records: the executed agreements, amendments, statements of work, data processing agreements, NDAs, insurance certificates, and related documents the user provides. The skill reviews the materials supplied; it does not query a CLM, CRM, email, or any other external system.
- Relationship context: what the vendor does for the organization and whether the vendor handles personal data.
- Expected agreement set (optional): the agreement types the firm expects for a vendor of this type. If not provided, use a general expected set and flag it as not firm-specific.
If no agreement records are provided, stop and request them.
Do Not Use When
- The user expects the agent to search a CLM, CRM, email, or document store — this skill reviews only the records the user supplies, and notes which expected sources were not available.
- The task is to review one agreement for risk — use
contract-risk-review, ornda-review/sow-review/dpa-reviewfor those document types. - The task is to summarize the changes between two drafts — use
redline-summary.
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 · 139 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A bd637986a417
Vendor Agreement Status is a skill published in the GitHub repository zgbrenner/agentcounsel (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 2,117 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
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.
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…