$ loading_
Compare contract clauses against internal policy requirements and identify gaps.
Copy the install command and let the AI configure it · recommended for beginners
Please install the "contract-policy-screen" skill from askskill: 1. Download https://raw.githubusercontent.com/microsoft/aibast-agents-library/main/solutions/contract-risk-review/manual/skills/compliance-check/SKILL.md 2. Save it as ~/.claude/skills/compliance-check/SKILL.md 3. Reload skills and tell me it's ready
Compare the following contract clauses against these internal policy requirements. First show a policy requirements table, then list gaps and any missing evidence. Do not mark missing evidence as pass. Clauses: … Policy requirements: …
A structured comparison showing each policy requirement, matching clause evidence, gaps, and items needing further review.
Check whether these clause excerpts cover internal policy items such as CTR-5002 and CTR-5004. Clearly flag unsupported items as requiring review and explain the gaps. Materials: …
A review result that flags items requiring review and explains which policy points lack clause support.
Turn this contract clause review into a concise summary: first describe policy coverage, then list major gaps and missing evidence. Contract content: … Internal policy: …
A concise summary suitable for reporting, covering policy coverage, gap areas, and missing evidence items.
Product, operations, or office teams can use it before manual review to compare contract clauses with internal policy requirements and quickly spot gaps or missing evidence.
When a team needs to verify whether existing clauses cover specific internal policy items, this skill helps map them and flag items that cannot be supported by evidence.
The document excerpt describes a skill for internal policy comparison. It compares contract clauses against policy requirements, presents the policy requirements table first, and then lists documented gaps. It also stresses that missing evidence must never be treated as a pass. For items such as CTR-5002 and CTR-5004, absent clause evidence should be marked as review required. The skill should not be described as legal or regulatory compliance advice.
Use for internal-policy comparison. Start with the exact heading
Internal Policy Requirements, show the policy table, then list documented
gaps. For CTR-5002 and CTR-5004 return REVIEW REQUIRED because clause evidence
is absent. Never convert missing evidence into PASS and never describe the
screen as legal or regulatory compliance advice.
It compares available contract clauses with internal policy requirements and reports gaps or missing evidence. The provided information explicitly frames it as an internal policy comparison aid, not legal or regulatory compliance advice.
The documentation says missing evidence must not be marked as pass and gaps should be listed. For CTR-5002 and CTR-5004, it should return a review-required result when clause evidence is absent.
The provided materials do not include installation, runtime, or configuration details. For implementation specifics, see the source repository.
Scan synthetic customer records to find evidence-backed cross-sell product gaps.
Draft prioritized cross-sell recommendations and a reviewable engagement plan from synthetic data.
Draft prioritized amendment positions and legal escalation points for contract renegotiations.
Rank a fictional contract portfolio to prioritize legal review attention.
Explain synthetic cross-sell affinity rules and benchmark assumptions from fixed evidence.
Compare synthetic cross-sell portfolio value scenarios for human-reviewed decision support.
Review contracts against playbooks with redlines, deviation flags, and impact analysis.
Draft contracts, check state law requirements, and analyze legal risks.
Review contracts, detect risks, and generate lawyer-ready redlines with AI.
Analyze contracts with clause extraction, span verification, and risk taxonomy lookup.
Analyze contract safety risks, flag dangerous clauses, and suggest improvements.
Assess compliance requirements, approvals, and risks for proposed features or initiatives.