
Contract Review
OfficialFreeSimplify contract analysis for small businesses.
Free · Opens the source repo
What Contract Review does
The Contract Review skill is designed to assist small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) in navigating the complexities of legal agreements without the need for in-house legal counsel. This skill can read contracts from various sources, including local files, Gmail attachments, and DocuSign envelopes, making it accessible and versatile. When a user requests a review of a contract, the skill analyzes the document for potential risks across eight critical categories, providing a comprehensive overview of the contract's implications.
Upon receiving a contract, the skill identifies the type of agreement—such as a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), Master Service Agreement (MSA), or a vendor contract—and distinguishes the parties involved. It then evaluates the contract against established risk categories, which include payment terms, liability, termination clauses, intellectual property rights, and more. Each category is assessed for common pitfalls, and the skill flags non-standard terms that could pose risks to the user’s business.
The output includes a severity-tiered summary that categorizes issues into red flags, yellow flags, and key terms to note. This structured approach allows users to quickly identify critical areas that require negotiation or further scrutiny. Additionally, the skill provides a negotiation playbook, offering practical advice on how to address flagged issues. Users can also export a marked-up redline DOCX document, preserving the original contract structure while highlighting suggested changes.
This skill is particularly useful for SMBs that may not have the resources to hire legal experts but still need to ensure that their contracts are fair and protect their interests. It empowers users to engage in negotiations with confidence, armed with a clear understanding of their contracts' terms and potential risks.
When to use it
Use this skill when you need to review a contract quickly and identify potential risks before signing.
When not to use it
This skill is not a substitute for legal advice; it should not be used for contracts requiring detailed legal interpretation or in high-stakes situations.
What you can build with it
Reviewing a Vendor Contract
A small business owner needs to assess a vendor contract before signing. They upload the document and receive a summary of potential risks.
Negotiating Payment Terms
A user wants to negotiate payment terms in a Master Service Agreement. The skill flags unfavorable terms and suggests alternatives.
Understanding an NDA
An entrepreneur is unsure about the implications of a Non-Disclosure Agreement. They use the skill to clarify key terms and risks.
How to install Contract Review
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/contract-review --agent claude-code2. Or install it manually
Download the skill folder and drop it into ~/.claude/skills/ for all projects, or .claude/skills/ to scope it to one repo. Restart Claude Code so it picks up the new skill.
Anthropic's agentic coding CLI, and the reference implementation of Agent Skills. Drop a skill folder into ~/.claude/skills and Claude Code loads it automatically whenever a task matches the skill's description. Claude Code docs
Inside SKILL.md
Written by anthropicsContract Review
Quick start
Attach a contract file, forward the email containing it, or paste the text directly.
User: "Review this MSA and flag anything I should push back on."
→ Skill reads the document, identifies parties and contract type,
analyzes 8 risk categories, returns a severity-tiered summary
with a negotiation playbook, and exports a redlined DOCX.
Workflow
-
Get the contract — Pull from one of three sources, in order of preference:
- Gmail: Search for recent emails with contract attachments (see
reference/gmail-fetch.md) - DocuSign: Fetch the envelope by ID or search recent drafts awaiting signature (see
reference/docusign-fetch.md) - Local file or paste: Read the PDF (chunked via
pagesparameter for 10+ page files) or DOCX via Read tool. If the user pastes text directly, work with what's provided.
Read the full document before analyzing. Dangerous clauses are frequently in exhibits and schedules at the back.
- Gmail: Search for recent emails with contract attachments (see
-
Identify contract type and parties — Determine agreement type (NDA, MSA, SOW, SaaS subscription, consulting, subcontractor, vendor) and which party is the user's company vs. the counterparty. Note if it looks like a counterparty template — these are typically one-sided and the counterparty expects pushback.
-
Analyze across 8 risk categories — Work through the contract from the ops/finance perspective of a small business owner without in-house legal. Categories are ordered by typical risk severity; use judgment for context.
Category 1: Payment terms and cash flow
- Payment timing: Net-30 is standard; Net-60+ is flaggable; Net-90/120 is a hard negotiation point
- Payment triggers: acceptance periods that let the client slow-walk approvals indefinitely
- Late payment penalties: absence is a gap worth noting
- Invoicing requirements: rigid formats or PO numbers that can delay payment on technicalities
- Expense reimbursement: pre-approval requirements and caps
- Rate adjustments: annual increase mechanism for multi-year engagements
Category 2: Liability and indemnification
- Liability caps: uncapped liability is always a red flag
- Mutual vs. one-sided indemnification
- Indemnification scope: "any and all claims arising from the services" is not standard
- Insurance requirements: E&O, cyber, general liability — achievability at the required limits
- Consequential damages waiver: missing = flag prominently
Category 3: Termination and exit
- Termination for convenience: is it mutual? 30-day notice is typical
- Termination for cause: cure period; vague "material breach" without definition
- Wind-down: payment for in-progress work at termination
- Transition assistance: paid vs. unpaid, time-limited vs. open-ended
- Survival clauses: indefinite indemnification survival = flag
Category 4: Intellectual property
- IP assignment vs. license
- Pre-existing IP and background tools carve-out — absence means inadvertent assignment
- Work product definition breadth: drafts, notes, internal tools
Category 5: Scope and change management
- Scope definition clarity
- Change order process: absence = scope creep without compensation
- Acceptance criteria: subjective ("to client's satisfaction") vs. defined
- Timeline asymmetry: user penalized for delays but client is not for slow feedback
Category 6: Non-compete and exclusivity
- Non-compete scope, definition of "competitor," duration
- Exclusivity requirements on the user's company
- Non-solicitation: employee poaching is normal; industry-broad restrictions are not
Category 7: Confidentiality and data
- Confidentiality scope: "all information shared" with no exceptions is overly broad
- Duration: 2–3 years is typical; perpetual is aggressive
- Data handling security requirements vs. company size and data sensitivity
- Return/destruction requirements post-termination
Category 8: Operational concerns
- Governing law and dispute resolution; mandatory arbitration
- Auto-renewal: opt-out window and notice period (missing a 60-day window is a common SMB mistake)
- Assignment rights, especially if the client gets acquired
- Most favored nation: constrains pricing across the entire client book
- Audit rights: scope and frequency
-
Present flagged summary — Organize by severity:
🔴 Red flags (push back before signing) — For each: quote the exact clause, explain the problem in plain language, suggest specific alternative language.
🟡 Yellow flags (negotiate, not deal-breakers) — For each: quote the clause, explain the concern, describe what "better" looks like.
🟢 Key terms to note (awareness only) — Payment schedules, notice periods, renewal dates, insurance requirements, key contacts.
📋 Contract summary — Plain-language summary: who does what, for how much, over what timeframe, under what conditions.
💡 Negotiation playbook — For each red and yellow flag: what to ask for, how to frame the ask, and what a reasonable compromise looks like.
-
Export redline DOCX — After presenting the summary, offer to export a redlined DOCX with the suggested changes marked up. Use the
docxskill to generate a Word document that:- Preserves the original contract structure
- Marks suggested deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline
- Adds a cover page summarizing the changes
Ask: "Want me to export a redlined DOCX you can send back to the counterparty?"
Approval gates
- Never characterize the output as legal advice. Always recommend attorney review for red flags or binding decisions.
- Quote actual clause language, not paraphrases. The user needs the exact text for negotiation calls.
- Flag what's missing, not just what's there. A contract silent on liability caps or change orders is often more dangerous than one with unfavorable terms.
- Do not flag standard boilerplate. If a clause is fair and market-standard, skip it. The user wants signal, not a clause-by-clause restatement.
- Compare to market norms when flagging: "Net-90 is uncommon in professional services — Net-30 is standard."
- Adjust recommendations to the power dynamic. A Fortune 500 procurement MSA is a different negotiation than a small startup agreement.
- Never send the redlined DOCX to the counterparty without explicit user confirmation.
Reference
reference/gotchas.md— edge cases in contract analysisreference/docusign-fetch.md— pulling envelopes from DocuSignreference/gmail-fetch.md— finding contract attachments in Gmailreference/examples/flagged-summary-saas.md— worked example: SaaS agreement review output
Frequently asked questions about Contract Review
Similar skills
Vendor Agreement Status
Streamline vendor agreement management across systems.
NDA Triage
Streamline your NDA screening process efficiently.
Contract Review
Streamline contract analysis against your negotiation playbook.
Meeting Briefing
Prepare structured legal meeting briefings and track actions.
Legal Risk Assessment
Evaluate and classify legal risks systematically.
Legal Response
Streamline legal inquiry responses with templates.
