Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

codexkit-contract-drafter

Draft commercial contracts from scratch by contract type — NDAs, service agreements, vendor contracts, employment agreements, and licensing deals. Follow a clause library approach with risk-balanced terms. Use when creating new contracts. Do not replace legal counsel sign-off on finalized agreements. For reviewing existing contracts, use contract-risk-review instead.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md4.7 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml174 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Contract Drafter

Purpose

Generate well-structured contracts using a clause library approach — producing balanced terms that protect both parties while reflecting business intent.

When to use

  • creating a new NDA, service agreement, or vendor contract from scratch
  • drafting a partnership or licensing agreement
  • creating an employment contract or consulting agreement
  • when no internal template exists for the contract type needed

When not to use

  • reviewing or redlining an existing contract (use contract-risk-review)
  • high-value M&A transactions (requires specialized legal counsel)
  • jurisdictions with specific regulatory requirements without local counsel input

Inputs

  • contract type (NDA / Service Agreement / Vendor Agreement / Employment / License / Partnership)
  • parties involved (names, roles, jurisdictions)
  • key commercial terms (scope, duration, pricing, payment terms)
  • specific requirements or non-standard terms
  • governing law preference
  • risk tolerance (conservative / balanced / aggressive)

Procedure

  1. Select contract template structure based on type:
    • Recitals (background and purpose)
    • Definitions section
    • Core commercial terms
    • Protective clauses
    • Standard boilerplate
  2. Draft core clauses — each with balanced terms:
    • Scope of Work / Services: clear deliverables + acceptance criteria
    • Payment Terms: milestones, net days, late payment interest
    • Term and Renewal: fixed term, auto-renewal notice period
    • Termination: for cause + for convenience, notice period, wind-down
  3. Draft protective clauses:
    • IP Ownership: background IP protected, work product assignment
    • Confidentiality: duration, permitted disclosures, return of info
    • Liability Cap: mutual cap at contract value (or last 12 months fees)
    • Indemnification: mutual, limited to direct damages
    • Force Majeure: modern clause including pandemic, cyber attack
    • Dispute Resolution: escalation path → mediation → arbitration/court
  4. Add boilerplate:
    • Entire Agreement, Severability, Waiver, Assignment, Notices
  5. Risk-calibrate based on tolerance:
    • Conservative: more protections, lower caps, stricter terms
    • Balanced: mutual obligations, reasonable caps
    • Aggressive: fewer restrictions, higher risk acceptance
  6. Flag missing clauses that the other party may request.

Output

  • complete contract draft organized by sections
  • clause-by-clause commentary explaining purpose and risk level
  • missing clauses checklist (what might need adding)
  • negotiation guide: which clauses are negotiable vs. firm
  • recommended next steps (legal review, counterparty review)

Definition of done

  • contract contains all sections appropriate for its type
  • every clause has a risk-level annotation
  • IP, liability, and confidentiality clauses are present
  • governing law and dispute resolution are specified

Examples

  • "Draft a mutual NDA between our company and a potential partner."
  • "Create a service agreement for a 6-month consulting engagement."
  • "Write an employment contract for a remote senior developer in Vietnam."

Quality Criteria

  • All placeholder sections are filled with domain-specific content
  • Structure follows the relevant industry standard or framework
  • Language matches target audience (technical / executive / legal)
  • Output is ready for review — not a rough draft requiring major rework

Verification (4C)

CheckQuestion
CorrectnessDoes the draft structure follow the stated framework or industry standard?
CompletenessAre all required sections present with substantive (not placeholder) content?
Context-fitDoes tone, detail level, and terminology match the intended audience?
ConsequenceIf sent to the intended recipient without further editing, what would fail?

Edge Cases

  • No existing template for this type — Use the closest available template and document all customizations made.
  • Stakeholder requirements conflict — Flag conflicts explicitly in the draft. Do not silently choose one requirement over another.
  • Output required in multiple formats — Produce the canonical format first, then derive others. Note any formatting limitations.

Changelog

  • v1.0.0 — Initial release

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

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.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Design rigorous A/B test plans with hypothesis, sample size calculation, Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE), randomization strategy, and decision rules. Includes guardrail metrics and rollout playbook. Use when planning product experiments, conversion optimization, or data-driven feature decisions.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hoavdc/CodexKit25Updated Oct 11, 2026

Review REST and GraphQL API designs for consistency, usability, and best practices. Covers naming conventions, versioning strategy, error format, pagination, authentication patterns, and breaking change detection. Use when reviewing API specs, designing new APIs, or auditing existing endpoints.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hoavdc/CodexKit25Updated Oct 11, 2026

Write Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) following the Michael Nygard format. Captures context, options considered, decision rationale, and consequences. Use when making technology choices, framework selections, or any architectural decision that future developers need to understand.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hoavdc/CodexKit25Updated Oct 11, 2026

Assess organizational readiness for financial audits (internal or external). Map assertions to account balances, check evidence completeness, score readiness using a Red/Amber/Green framework, and generate a remediation timeline. Aligned with SOX, IFRS, and GAAP audit standards. Use before scheduled audits or when preparing for first-time compliance.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hoavdc/CodexKit25Updated Oct 11, 2026

Design safe recurring Codex automations with clear prompts, outputs, schedules, and gating rules.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hoavdc/CodexKit25Updated Oct 11, 2026

Refine Product Backlog Items to meet INVEST criteria. Write User Stories with Acceptance Criteria in Given/When/Then format, estimate with Story Points, and flag dependencies. Use before sprint planning when backlog items need grooming. Do not use to prioritize the backlog — that is the Product Owner's decision.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

hoavdc/CodexKit25Updated Oct 11, 2026

See all skills by hoavdc

Report a problem with this skill