$ loading_
Review marketing copy for claims that need substantiation, reframing, or cutting. Use when the user says "review this marketing copy", "check these claims", "can we say this", "is this puffery or a problem", or pastes marketing content (landing pages, emails, ads, taglines).
复制安装指令，让 AI 自动完成配置 · 推荐新手
请帮我安装 askskill 上的 "marketing-claims-review" 技能： 1. 下载 https://raw.githubusercontent.com/anthropics/claude-for-legal/main/product-legal/skills/marketing-claims-review/SKILL.md 2. 保存为 ~/.claude/skills/marketing-claims-review/SKILL.md 3. 装好后重载技能，告诉我可以用了
~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/product-legal/CLAUDE.md → Marketing claims standards./product-legal:marketing-claims-review
[paste landing page copy]
Matter context. Check ## Matter workspaces in the practice-level CLAUDE.md. If Enabled is ✗ (the default for in-house users), skip the rest of this paragraph — skills use practice-level context and the matter machinery is invisible. If enabled and there is no active matter, ask: "Which matter is this for? Run /product-legal:matter-workspace switch <slug> or say practice-level." Load the active matter's matter.md for matter-specific context and overrides. Write outputs to the matter folder at ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/product-legal/matters/<matter-slug>/. Never read another matter's files unless Cross-matter context is on.
Marketing wants to say the product is the best. Legal needs it to be true, or at least not provably false. This skill finds the claims that will get a demand letter from a competitor or an inquiry from a regulator, and suggests how to keep the energy while fixing the exposure.
Read ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/product-legal/CLAUDE.md → ## Marketing claims:
Research the currently operative advertising and substantiation standards for the applicable jurisdictions and media (for example, FTC, NAD, state UDAP regimes, sector regulators for healthcare / financial / children's products, and platform-specific policies). Identify what substantiation the specific claim requires — who measured it, when, sample size, apples-to-apples basis — not just whether some substantiation exists on file. Flag implied claims and comparative claims for heightened scrutiny. Verify currency: endorsement and review guides have been updated recently and continue to evolve. Cite primary sources with pinpoint references. If you cannot verify the current standard, flag for attorney verification — do not state a rule you haven't confirmed.
Only cite the standards that apply to the specific claims under review. A blanket list of every FTC guideline, NAD practice note, or sector rule makes the load-bearing ones invisible. Do not cite the Endorsement Guides (16 CFR Part 255) unless the copy contains an endorsement, testimonial, or influencer content. Do not cite disclosure-overlay rules unless a claim in the asset triggers the overlay. Do not cite a sector regulator unless the copy targets or implicates that sector. A standard earns its place in the output by mapping to a specific quoted claim; otherwise drop it.
No silent supplement. If a research query to the configured legal research tool returns few or no results for the applicable standard (FTC rule, NAD decision, state UDAP, sector rule, platform policy), report what was found and stop. Do NOT fill the gap from web search or model knowledge without asking. Say: "The search returned [N] results from [tool]. Coverage appears thin for [standard / jurisdiction]. Options: (1) broaden the search query, (2) try a different research tool, (3) search the web — results will be tagged
[web search — verify]and should be checked against the issuing authority before relying, or (4) flag as unverified and stop. Which would you like?" A lawyer decides whether to accept lower-confidence sources.
…
Review and approve (or reject) pending playbook update proposals from the playbook-monitor agent and apply approved changes to the practice profile. Use when the playbook-monitor agent has surfaced proposals, when the user says "review playbook proposals", "what playbook updates are pending", or wants to step through deviation-driven playbook changes.
Reference: review of SaaS subscription agreements with attention to the terms that matter most in subscription deals — auto-renewal mechanics, price escalation, data portability, uptime SLAs, and subprocessor rights. Loaded by /commercial-legal:review when a SaaS or subscription agreement is detected.
Drafts board or committee meeting minutes in your house format. Auto-detects upcoming board and committee meetings from your calendar, asks for the agenda and any slides or pre-read materials, and produces a complete draft in the format learned from your seed minutes. Also handles written consents in lieu of meetings. Trigger: "board minutes", "draft minutes", "upcoming board meeting", "committee minutes", "written consent", or calendar detection of an upcoming board or committee event.
Aggregate diligence findings into a deal team briefing at the right altitude for the audience — exec summary for leadership, working summary for the team. Use when user says "brief the deal team", "what's the state of diligence", "summarize findings for [audience]", "deal update", or on the briefing cadence.
Entity compliance tracker — initialize, report upcoming deadlines, update status, run health audit, export to CSV. Maintains a compliance-tracker.yaml built from the entity table, calculates filing deadlines by entity and jurisdiction, and surfaces what's due in the next 30/60/90 days. Use when user says "entity compliance", "filing deadlines", "annual reports due", "entity tracker", "what filings are due", "entity health", or "good standing".
Trace how a contract has changed across its base agreement and all amendments — either a summary of all changes over time, or a provision trace for a specific clause. Use when the user says "what changed in this contract over time", "show me the amendment history", "where's the latest [clause]", "how has [provision] evolved", or uploads multiple versions of an agreement.