Docusign contract extractor
Contract review: 15-element extraction + 17 red-flag scan. Not legal advice. Agent skill.
npx -y skills add fengyiqicoder/docusign-contract-extractorAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when the user shares a contract, MSA, SOW, NDA, vendor agreement, lease, employment offer, or any legal document and asks for a summary, key terms, risk review, "what am I signing", "should I sign this", red flags, renewal dates, or to extract specific clauses. Triggers on phrases like "review this contract", "what does this mean", "is this normal", "find the auto-renewal clause", "summarize this MSA". Also triggers when user uploads a .pdf or .docx contract file or pastes contract text.
SKILL.md
6.3 KB, ~1.4k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Contract Extractor & Risk Reviewer
Overview
Most SMB owners sign contracts without reading them — then discover an auto-renewal clause, a non-compete, or an indemnification cap after something goes wrong. This skill extracts the 15 key elements every business contract has, flags risk language, and produces a 1-page review the user can act on.
Core principle: A contract review is not legal advice. It's a structured surface-level read that catches the things a non-lawyer would miss. When you find something material, tell the user to consult a lawyer — do not interpret.
The 15 elements to extract from every contract
Parties & basics
- Parties — full legal names, entity types, jurisdictions
- Effective date — when the contract starts
- Term — initial period (months/years)
- Renewal — auto-renew? notice period? rate change?
Money
- Total consideration — what's being paid, by whom
- Payment terms — Net 30/60/90, milestones, late fees
- Price escalator — annual increases, CPI clauses
Scope & deliverables
- Scope of work / services / goods — what's actually being delivered
- Performance standards / SLAs — measurable commitments
- Acceptance criteria — when is delivery "done"
Risk
- Termination — for cause, for convenience, notice required
- Liability cap — max damages either party can claim
- Indemnification — who covers whose lawsuits
- Confidentiality — what's protected, for how long
- Governing law & dispute resolution — which state's law, arbitration vs. court
Workflow
Step 1: Get the document into context
Ask the user to either:
- Paste the contract text directly
- Upload the PDF/DOCX
- Share a DocuSign link (note: link only — Claude cannot access logged-in DocuSign)
If PDF/DOCX, use the pdf or docx skill to extract text first.
Step 2: First-pass extraction
Pull the 15 elements into a structured table. Quote exact language when possible — don't paraphrase legal text.
Step 3: Risk flag scan
Look for the 17 high-risk clauses in references/red-flag-clauses.md. For each found, surface it with the exact language.
Step 4: Generate the review
See references/review-template.md for the deliverable format.
Step 5: Lawyer escalation
If the contract has any of these, strongly recommend a lawyer review before signing:
- Annual value > $25K
- Multi-year term with no termination-for-convenience
- Personal guarantee
- Equity / convertible note involvement
- Non-compete or non-solicit
- Liability caps below contract value
- Indemnification with no carve-outs
- Anything in a foreign jurisdiction
- IP assignment language
What you do NOT do
- ❌ Do not say "this contract is good/bad/fair"
- ❌ Do not say "this clause is enforceable"
- ❌ Do not predict what a court would rule
- ❌ Do not say "ignore this clause, it never matters"
- ❌ Do not draft replacement language without a lawyer's input
- ❌ Do not pretend to be a lawyer or give legal advice
Always remind the user: "I'm not a lawyer. This is a structured summary, not legal advice."
Contract type quick reference
| Document type | Key thing to find | Common landmine |
|---|---|---|
| SaaS Subscription | Auto-renewal + notice period | 30-day cancel notice into a 1-year renewal |
| MSA + SOW | Master vs. SOW terms hierarchy | Liability cap may live in MSA, not SOW |
| NDA | Duration + jurisdiction | Perpetual confidentiality is unusual |
| Vendor agreement | Payment terms + late fees | Net 60+ with personal guarantee |
| Employment offer | Non-compete + IP assignment | Overbroad inventions assignment |
| Lease (commercial) | Personal guarantee + CAM | Triple-net hidden in fine print |
| Lease (equipment) | Buyout vs. return | Buyout > FMV at end |
| Independent contractor | IP ownership + termination | Work-for-hire vs. assignment |
| Distribution / reseller | Exclusivity + territory | Perpetual exclusivity with low minimums |
| Loan / credit agreement | Personal guarantee + covenants | Cross-default with other obligations |
Auto-renewal: the #1 SMB landmine
Auto-renewals are the most common gotcha. Every SMB has been bitten.
When you find auto-renewal language, surface it like this:
⚠️ Auto-renewal detected
- Current term ends: [date]
- Renews for: [period]
- Notice required to cancel: [X days before end date]
- Action by: [today + (term end - X days)]
- Price on renewal: [same / increases by Y%]
Add a calendar reminder for [action date] now.
Critical risk indicators (high-bar items)
If you see any of these, flag with 🚨 and full stop the review:
- "Joint and several liability" with another party
- "Liquidated damages" > 25% of contract value
- "Specific performance" as a remedy in non-real-estate contracts
- "Perpetual" license assignment of your IP
- Foreign arbitration (e.g., ICC in Paris) when you're a US SMB
- Personal guarantee of corporate obligations
- No liability cap on your side
- One-way indemnification with no carve-outs
Common mistakes when reviewing
| User asks | Your trap | Right answer |
|---|---|---|
| "Is this normal?" | Saying "yes/no" without context | "Here's what's standard; here's what differs in your contract" |
| "Should I sign?" | Recommending | "Here are the risks; decision is yours; lawyer for >$25K" |
| "This clause is fine, right?" | Validating | Restate the clause and its implications, don't validate |
| "Just give me the gist" | Skipping details | One-paragraph summary + full review available |
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most note taking skills give in ~1.4k tokens
Counted across 686 of the 876 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- include a visual element on every slidein 44 of 686, across 13 files
- use wikilinks for internal vault linksin 35 of 686, across 11 files
- commit to a single visual motif across every slidein 34 of 686, across 9 files
- read pptxgenjs guide before creating presentations from scratchin 30 of 686, across 6 files
- keep 0.5 inch minimum marginsin 30 of 686, across 7 files
- use subagents to visually inspect rendered slidesin 30 of 686, across 6 files
- re-verify affected slides after every fixin 27 of 686, across 5 files
- run content QA checks before declaring successin 26 of 686, across 3 files
- Use Markdown links for external URLs onlyin 26 of 686, across 10 files
- pick a bold topic specific color palettein 24 of 686, across 2 files
- read editing guide before editing existing presentationsin 23 of 686, across 1 file
- use one dominant color across all slidesin 23 of 686, across 1 file
Said here and by no other author read
- extract the 15 key contract elements
- quote exact language for extracted clauses
- scan for the 17 high-risk clauses
- surface exact language for found red flags
- generate a 1-page contract review
- recommend lawyer review for critical risk indicators
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.