Clause checklist en

Skill matematicsolutions/awesome-matematic-skills-en/verification-foundation/skills/clause-checklist-en

English hub of method-neutral legal AI skills (verification core, content quality, EU law) - bundle model. Polish-jurisdiction skills live in awesome-matematic-skills-pl.

Install

npx -y skills add matematicsolutions/awesome-matematic-skills-en --skill clause-checklist-en

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

2 things to look at

no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
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

A clause checklist for a single contract - walks the contract against 41 clause categories (the CUAD taxonomy) and marks each one present / absent / risky, so the clause that should be there but is missing does not slip through. Extractive (quotes the contract, does not paraphrase). Common-law native, jurisdiction-neutral framing. Different from a bulk audit - this goes deep on one contract and asks "what is missing and what bites here". Pairs with adversarial-legal-review-en and reviewer-en. Use when: "check the clauses in this contract", "what is missing from this agreement", "clause spotting", "contract checklist", "review a single contract", "which clauses are risky" - before signing, in negotiation, or in DD of one contract.

The file declares its own license as Apache-2.0. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.

SKILL.md

4.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Clause checklist - what a contract is missing, and what bites

Philosophy

The most expensive clauses are the ones that are not in the contract. Reviewing a contract is not only reading what is written - it is checking that no safeguard this deal needs is absent. This skill walks the contract against a fixed list of 41 clause categories and, for each, says: present / absent / present-but-risky, quoting the clause when present.

It is extractive - what it shows comes from the contract, not from paraphrase. It flags presence and risk; the assessment and the call stay with the lawyer.

The 41 categories (CUAD taxonomy)

Groups follow CUAD (1-6) plus ungrouped categories. For each: present / absent / risky + a quote when present.

Contract metadata

Document name, Parties (verify authority to sign), Governing law.

Group 1 - term and dates

Agreement date · Effective date · Expiration date · Renewal term (auto-renew?) · Notice period to terminate renewal.

Group 2 - competition restrictions

Non-compete · Exclusivity · No-solicit of customers · Competitive restriction exception (carve-outs).

Group 3 - control and assignment

Change of control (consent/termination on M&A?) · Anti-assignment.

Group 4 - licences

License grant · Non-transferable license · Affiliate license (licensor) · Affiliate license (licensee) · Unlimited/all-you-can-eat license · Irrevocable or perpetual license.

Group 5 - post-term and audit

Post-termination services · Audit rights.

Group 6 - liability

Uncapped liability · Cap on liability.

Ungrouped

Most favored nation · No-solicit of employees · Non-disparagement · Termination for convenience · ROFR/ROFO/ROFN · Revenue/profit sharing · Price restrictions · Minimum commitment · Volume restriction · IP ownership assignment · Joint IP ownership · Source code escrow · Covenant not to sue · Liquidated damages · Warranty duration · Insurance · Third-party beneficiary.

Output format

RED FLAGS (top):
- ABSENT: <category> - <why it is a risk in this deal>
- RISKY: <category> - <how it is one-sided>

41-CATEGORY TABLE:
| Category | Status | Note | Quote (if present) |
| Governing law | present | New York; courts of NY | "..." |
| Cap on liability | absent | no liability ceiling | - |
...

Limits

A presence-and-risk checklist, not an interpretation of clause wording. Whether a clause is effective, and the recommendation, are the lawyer's.
The taxonomy is common-law-oriented at source (CUAD); for a specific jurisdiction add local-law anchors (for Poland, see klauzule-kontraktowe-pl).
Descriptive references without a clause ("the parties intend to cooperate") have nothing to match - mark as "no clause, manual check".

Attribution

The 41-category clause taxonomy is based on CUAD (Contract Understanding Atticus Dataset), The Atticus Project, CC BY 4.0 (https://www.atticusprojectai.org/cuad). Category descriptions and the risk framing are MateMatic's own. MateMatic interpretation, not the position of any bar or regulator.