Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →onewave-ai/contract-redliner
Reads a contract and generates redline suggestions with replacement language. Identifies unfavorable terms, missing protections, ambiguous language, liability exposure, IP risks, termination traps, and auto-renewal gotchas. Produces a contract-review.md with clause-by-clause analysis, risk ratings, tracked changes format, and negotiation talking points.
Passed 12 of 20 test cases with the skill, and 10 of 20 without it.
and 4 more in the full report
5 fixed9 passed either way6 still failing3 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 5 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Please run a legal audit on this short equipment lease agreement and save the report to `contract-review.md`. Only analyze Section 2 because Section 1 is just standard boilerplate governing law. ```text Section 1. Governing Law. This Agreement is governed by Delaware law. Section 2. Maintenance. Lessee is solely responsible for all maintenance, repairs, and total replacement of equipment regardless of fault or pre-existing defects. ```
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Includes an evaluation entry for Section 1 in the review report alongside Section 2. | Missed | Passed |
| Rates Section 1 as ACCEPTABLE or low risk with a brief explanatory note rather than omitting it. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Read a contract and produce a contract-review.md with clause-by-clause analysis, risk ratings, replacement language in tracked-changes format, and negotiation talking points. Unlike contract-analyzer (which only flags issues), produce specific, drop-in replacement language for every problematic clause, ready for negotiation.
references/risk-categories.md -- the seven risk categories, what to look for in each, and the risk-rating system.references/redline-format.md -- per-issue redline entry format and tracked-changes conventions.references/output-template.md -- the full contract-review.md structure to generate.references/contract-types.md -- per-contract-type focus areas and worked examples.Ingest the contract. Accept pasted text, a file path (.txt, .md, .pdf, .docx), or a URL. Load files with the Read tool; for PDFs use the pdf skill or Read PDF support. Parse the full text and identify all numbered sections, clauses, and subclauses.
Identify type and parties. Determine contract type, Party A (drafter/company), Party B (signer), governing law, effective date, and term. Apply the matching focus area from references/contract-types.md.
Analyze every section. Evaluate each section against the seven risk categories in references/risk-categories.md. Assign each section a rating (CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / ACCEPTABLE). Mark fair sections as ACCEPTABLE with a brief note -- do not skip them.
Generate redlines. For every issue, produce a redline entry per the format and tracked-changes conventions in references/redline-format.md. Provide complete, standalone replacement language plus a clean accepted version.
Write contract-review.md. Generate the file in the working directory (or the directory the user specifies) following references/output-template.md exactly and in order.
Open every output with this disclaimer verbatim:
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This analysis is informational only and does not constitute legal advice. Contract interpretation is jurisdiction-specific and fact-dependent. Always consult a qualified attorney before signing or modifying any legal agreement. This tool is designed to surface potential issues and suggest alternative language for discussion purposes only.
Never provide incomplete replacement language; every redline includes a full, usable clause.
Never present analysis without quoting the specific contract language being discussed.
Never assume jurisdiction-specific enforceability; note when a provision's enforceability varies by jurisdiction.
Always produce contract-review.md as the primary deliverable.
Always use tracked-changes format ([-deletion-] / [+insertion+]) for every suggested change.
Always include negotiation talking points for every issue rated MEDIUM or above.
Always analyze from the signing party's perspective unless told otherwise.
test cases passed, vs 10 / 20 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.