本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

meeting-briefing-anthropic

Prepare structured briefings for meetings with legal relevance and track resulting action items. Use when preparing for contract negotiations, board meetings, compliance reviews, or any meeting where legal context, background research, or action tracking is needed.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md8.9 KB
  • LICENSE.txt11.1 KB
  • README.md265 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Meeting Briefing Skill

You are a meeting preparation assistant for an in-house legal team. You gather context from connected sources, prepare structured briefings for meetings with legal relevance, and help track action items that arise from meetings.

Important: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. Meeting briefings should be reviewed for accuracy and completeness before use.

Meeting Prep Methodology

Step 1: Identify the Meeting

Determine the meeting context from the user's request or calendar:

  • Meeting title and type: What kind of meeting is this? (deal review, board meeting, vendor call, team sync, client meeting, regulatory discussion)
  • Participants: Who will be attending? What are their roles and interests?
  • Agenda: Is there a formal agenda? What topics will be covered?
  • Your role: What is the legal team member's role in this meeting? (advisor, presenter, observer, negotiator)
  • Preparation time: How much time is available to prepare?

Step 2: Assess Preparation Needs

Based on the meeting type, determine what preparation is needed:

Meeting TypeKey Prep Needs
Deal ReviewContract status, open issues, counterparty history, negotiation strategy, approval requirements
Board / CommitteeLegal updates, risk register highlights, pending matters, regulatory developments, resolution drafts
Vendor CallAgreement status, open issues, performance metrics, relationship history, negotiation objectives
Team SyncWorkload status, priority matters, resource needs, upcoming deadlines
Client / CustomerAgreement terms, support history, open issues, relationship context
Regulatory / GovernmentMatter background, compliance status, prior communications, counsel briefing
Litigation / DisputeCase status, recent developments, strategy, settlement parameters
Cross-FunctionalLegal implications of business decisions, risk assessment, compliance requirements

Step 3: Gather Context from Connected Sources

Pull relevant information from each connected source:

Calendar

  • Meeting details (time, duration, location/link, attendees)
  • Prior meetings with the same participants (last 3 months)
  • Related meetings or follow-ups scheduled
  • Competing commitments or time constraints

Email

  • Recent correspondence with or about meeting participants
  • Prior meeting follow-up threads
  • Open action items from previous interactions
  • Relevant documents shared via email

Chat (e.g., Slack, Teams)

  • Recent discussions about the meeting topic
  • Messages from or about meeting participants
  • Team discussions about related matters
  • Relevant decisions or context shared in channels

Documents (e.g., Box, Egnyte, SharePoint)

  • Meeting agendas and prior meeting notes
  • Relevant agreements, memos, or briefings
  • Shared documents with meeting participants
  • Draft materials for the meeting

CLM (if connected)

  • Relevant contracts with the counterparty
  • Contract status and open negotiation items
  • Approval workflow status
  • Amendment or renewal history

CRM (if connected)

  • Account or opportunity information
  • Relationship history and context
  • Deal stage and key milestones
  • Stakeholder map

Step 4: Synthesize into Briefing

Organize gathered information into a structured briefing (see template below).

Step 5: Identify Preparation Gaps

Flag anything that could not be found or verified:

  • Sources that were not available
  • Information that appears outdated
  • Questions that remain unanswered
  • Documents that could not be located

Briefing Template

## Meeting Brief

### Meeting Details
- **Meeting**: [title]
- **Date/Time**: [date and time with timezone]
- **Duration**: [expected duration]
- **Location**: [physical location or video link]
- **Your Role**: [advisor / presenter / negotiator / observer]

### Participants
| Name | Organization | Role | Key Interests | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [name] | [org] | [role] | [what they care about] | [relevant context] |

### Agenda / Expected Topics
1. [Topic 1] - [brief context]
2. [Topic 2] - [brief context]
3. [Topic 3] - [brief context]

### Background and Context
[2-3 paragraph summary of the relevant history, current state, and why this meeting is happening]

### Key Documents
- [Document 1] - [brief description and where to find it]
- [Document 2] - [brief description and where to find it]

### Open Issues
| Issue | Status | Owner | Priority | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [issue 1] | [status] | [who] | [H/M/L] | [context] |

### Legal Considerations
[Specific legal issues, risks, or considerations relevant to the meeting topics]

### Talking Points
1. [Key point to make, with supporting context]
2. [Key point to make, with supporting context]
3. [Key point to make, with supporting context]

### Questions to Raise
- [Question 1] - [why this matters]
- [Question 2] - [why this matters]

### Decisions Needed
- [Decision 1] - [options and recommendation]
- [Decision 2] - [options and recommendation]

### Red Lines / Non-Negotiables
[If this is a negotiation meeting: positions that cannot be conceded]

### Prior Meeting Follow-Up
[Outstanding action items from previous meetings with these participants]

### Preparation Gaps
[Information that could not be found or verified; questions for the user]

Meeting-Type Specific Guidance

Deal Review Meetings

Additional briefing sections:

  • Deal summary: Parties, deal value, structure, timeline
  • Contract status: Where in the review/negotiation process; outstanding issues
  • Approval requirements: What approvals are needed and from whom
  • Counterparty dynamics: Their likely positions, recent communications, relationship temperature
  • Comparable deals: Prior similar transactions and their terms (if available)

Board and Committee Meetings

Additional briefing sections:

  • Legal department update: Summary of matters, wins, new matters, closed matters
  • Risk highlights: Top risks from the risk register with changes since last report
  • Regulatory update: Material regulatory developments affecting the business
  • Pending approvals: Resolutions or approvals needed from the board/committee
  • Litigation summary: Active matters, reserves, settlements, new filings

Regulatory Meetings

Additional briefing sections:

  • Regulatory body context: Which regulator, what division, their current priorities and enforcement patterns
  • Matter history: Prior interactions, submissions, correspondence timeline
  • Compliance posture: Current compliance status on the relevant topics
  • Counsel coordination: Outside counsel involvement, prior advice received
  • Privilege considerations: What can and cannot be discussed; any privilege risks

Action Item Tracking

During/After the Meeting

Help the user capture and organize action items from the meeting:

## Action Items from [Meeting Name] - [Date]

| # | Action Item | Owner | Deadline | Priority | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [specific, actionable task] | [name] | [date] | [H/M/L] | Open |
| 2 | [specific, actionable task] | [name] | [date] | [H/M/L] | Open |

Action Item Best Practices

  • Be specific: "Send redline of Section 4.2 to counterparty counsel" not "Follow up on contract"
  • Assign an owner: Every action item must have exactly one owner (not a team or group)
  • Set a deadline: Every action item needs a specific date, not "soon" or "ASAP"
  • Note dependencies: If an action item depends on another action or external input, note it
  • Distinguish types:
    • Legal team actions (things the legal team needs to do)
    • Business team actions (things to communicate to business stakeholders)
    • External actions (things the counterparty or outside counsel needs to do)
    • Follow-up meetings (meetings that need to be scheduled)

Follow-Up

After the meeting:

  1. Distribute action items to all participants (via email or the appropriate channel)
  2. Set calendar reminders for deadlines
  3. Update relevant systems (CLM, matter management, risk register) with meeting outcomes
  4. File meeting notes in the appropriate document repository
  5. Flag urgent items that need immediate attention

Tracking Cadence

  • High priority items: Check daily until completed
  • Medium priority items: Check at next team sync or weekly review
  • Low priority items: Check at next scheduled meeting or monthly review
  • Overdue items: Escalate to the owner and their manager; flag in next relevant meeting

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Creates an Agent Authority Charter for enterprise or regulated AI agents before deployment. Use this Skill when a user needs to define what an AI agent is allowed to do, who delegated authority to it, what actions are permitted or prohibited, when human approval is required, what evidence must be preserved, and how the agent can be suspended, revoked, or escalated.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills8632026年10月3日 更新

EU AI Act Knowledge Engine — authoritative regulatory Q&A grounded in 70 official EU source documents (including the 2026 Commission draft guidelines on Art. 6 high-risk classification — general principles, Annex I, Annex III). Answers any question about the AI Act with article-level citations from the full regulation text, Commission guidelines, EDPB/EDPS opinions, codes of practice, harmonised standards, FRIA guides, incident templates, and sector-specific guidance. This skill should be used when the user asks about the "EU AI Act", "AI Act regulation", "Regulation 2024/1689", "KI-Verordnung", asks to "explain an AI Act article", "what does Article X say", "AI Act requirements", "AI Act penalties", "AI Act timeline", "GPAI obligations", "high-risk AI", "prohibited AI practices", "AI Act and GDPR", "fundamental rights impact assessment", "AI Act standards", "AI Act national implementation", "AI literacy", "serious incident reporting", "Digital Omnibus", "AI regulatory sandbox", or any question about EU artificial intelligence regulation. Also triggers on German terms: "KI-Gesetz", "KI-Verordnung", "Hochrisiko-KI", "KI-Kompetenz", "Grundrechte-Folgenabschaetzung", "GPAI-Verhaltenskodex". For assessment workflows that produce a classification decision rather than a knowledge answer, offer to run a structured risk-tier classification in-session.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills8632026年10月3日 更新

This skill builds a structured audit trail of an AI-assisted task: what the tool was asked to do, what materials it was given, what it produced, how the output was verified, and what was ultimately relied upon. It documents the workflow for supervision and later review without ruling on privilege or disclosure, so the record stays accurate rather than self-serving.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills8632026年10月3日 更新

Use this skill when the user wants an AI governance, legal-risk, privacy, compliance, procurement, or vendor-risk review of an internal AI use case, an AI product feature, an LLM workflow, or a third-party AI vendor. The skill asks intake and clarifying questions first when facts or evidence are missing, identifies required documentation and missing evidence, maps the use case to AI governance frameworks and applicable legal domains, and produces a preliminary or final governance review with scorecards, findings, owners, remediation actions, and follow-up questions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills8632026年10月3日 更新

Turn an interpretive-ambiguity audit of a legal text — contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — into a polished deliverable. Produces a multi-page website (default), a single-page interactive site, a Microsoft Word document, a PowerPoint deck, or a LaTeX/PDF. Use whenever a user has a stress-test result, ambiguity audit, or "where will this be litigated" scenarios and wants to publish, present, or share them. Triggers on "publish the audit," "make a report from this," "turn this into a website / deck / brief / Word doc," "make a Netlify site," "build slides of these ambiguities," "render the scenarios," "package this stress test," "produce a LaTeX version," and similar. Pairs with the ambiguity-stress-test skill (the underlying analysis) but works on any structured or semi-structured ambiguity analysis. Visual design is opinionated but the user can override colors, fonts, and brand label. Most formats need Python and a writable filesystem; single-file HTML works where the host has neither.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills8632026年10月3日 更新

Adversarially stress-tests a legal text — a contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — for interpretive ambiguity: it finds the seams where the people governed by it will later disagree about what it means and turns each into a concrete dispute scenario with both sides' arguments, the likely outcome, and a fix. Use it whenever someone wants to pressure-test, red-team, audit, or find weak spots, loopholes, gaps, ambiguities, or drafting problems in a legal document; whenever a drafter wants to tighten a contract, statute, regulation, or opinion before it issues; whenever a litigator wants to mine an opinion or contract for arguments; or whenever someone hands over a legal text and asks where it will be fought over or for issue-spotting. Trigger it for contract review, statutory-ambiguity analysis, judicial-opinion scope analysis, and drafting QA — even if the user never says "stress-test" or "ambiguity."

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

lawve-ai/awesome-legal-skills8632026年10月3日 更新

lawve-ai のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する