Prepare a briefing on one litigation matter using its records and event history. Summarize recent changes, deadlines, financial exposure, and open questions, with prompts to reconsider recorded risk ratings before a meeting or update.
Deep briefing on one matter — current posture, what's changed, next deadline, open questions, and a risk re-assessment check, ready before a GC update or outside counsel call. Use when the user says "brief me on [matter]", "where are we on [matter]", or needs a read on a specific matter.
Run score Not tested
See how to installReview the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md → risk calibration + relevant stakeholders.~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/[slug]/matter.md + ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/[slug]/history.md + log row from _log.yaml.risk: field still reflect reality?").last_updated > 30 days, say so.Give the counsel a clean read on one matter in the time it takes to walk to a conference room. Current posture, what's changed, what's next, what's worth reconsidering.
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/_log.yaml — structured row~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/[slug]/matter.md — narrative intake~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/matters/[slug]/history.md — event log~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/litigation-legal/CLAUDE.md — risk calibration (so "risk: high" means something specific, not generic)Conflicts gate — unbypassable. Before briefing, check _log.yaml for the matter slug. If the matter is not in _log.yaml, refuse and route:
"I don't see [matter slug] in the matter log. Run
/litigation-legal:matter-intakefirst so the conflicts check runs and the matter workspace is set up. I won't build a briefing on a matter that hasn't been intaken — the conflicts check is the gate."
Slug (required). If ambiguous or missing, ask the user to pick from a list of active matters.
[WORK-PRODUCT HEADER — per plugin config ## Outputs — differs by role; see `## Who's using this`]
# [Matter Name] — Briefing as of [today]
**Status:** [status / stage]
**Risk:** [rating] ([severity] × [likelihood])
**Materiality:** [category]
**Outside counsel:** [firm — lead]
**Last updated:** [date] [flag ⚠️ STALE if >30d]
**Conflicts:** [status — flag ⚠️ if `pending` or `not-run`]
---
## One-paragraph summary
[Current posture. What are we doing and why. Name the pivot fact if one is captured.]
## What's changed recently
[Last 3-5 entries from history.md, most recent first. If history is thin, say so.]
## What's next
- **Immediate deadline:** [next_deadline + what it is]
- **Upcoming milestones:** [anything dated in matter.md or recent history]
- **Decisions pending:** [open questions flagged in matter.md]
## Exposure
[Range + any change since intake. If reserved, current reserve + whether recalibration is overdue.]
## Internal owners
[Who's looped in; whether anyone should be looped in and isn't]
## Risk re-assessment check
*A prompt, not an answer.*
- Does `risk: [rating]` still feel right, or has the case moved?
- Does `materiality: [category]` still match? (New facts might push toward reserve or disclosure.)
- Any new stakeholder the matter needs (e.g., CISO becomes relevant after a discovery development)?
## Open questions
[From matter.md and anything unresolved in history]
## For the conversation
[If user specified a purpose — "brief me before the call with outside counsel" — tailor the final section: questions to ask, decisions to get, updates to extract. If no purpose given, omit this section.]
If last_updated > 30 days ago: flag at the top AND suggest running /litigation-legal:matter-update [slug] after the meeting to capture whatever's discussed.
This is not marketing. Say what's known; flag what's not. If a matter has thin history and was just opened, the briefing is short — and that's correct. Don't pad.
End with the next-steps decision tree per CLAUDE.md ## Outputs. Customize the options to what this skill just produced — the five default branches (draft the X, escalate, get more facts, watch and wait, something else) are a starting point, not a lock-in. The tree is the output; the lawyer picks.
/matter-update with field changes — this skill reads, doesn't write.No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Build an AI system register for EU AI Act reviews. Track owners, deployment status, EU connections, and each system’s role and risk category through a guided discussion, preserving classification reasons and dates for future review.
Coordinate bulk contract clause extraction with Luminance or Kira, prepare loading requests, and check returned results according to your team's review settings. Assess flagged clauses against the transaction and organize findings and required consents.
Create an AI impact assessment in your team's format. Gather system details through conversation, analyze risks and applicable regulatory classifications, check consistency with internal policy, and document recommendations, safeguards, and conditions for deployment.
Trace changes across an original contract and its amendments. Get a chronological overview or follow one clause through successive revisions, with section references, current wording, and flags for conflicting or unclear language that needs legal review.
Check installed community skills for updates, review file changes and expanded permissions, and flag outdated references. Updates require explicit approval, with backups available to restore the previous version if needed.
Practice for a U.S. bar exam with questions matched to the exam format, jurisdiction, and weak subjects. Get explanations for answer choices, essay feedback, and session records that reveal recurring mistakes and guide further practice.