legal-research
Guides legal research from issue framing through authority collection, jurisdiction scoping, source prioritization, synthesis, and pre-filing updates. Use when planning or auditing legal research, building a research trail, developing rule statements, comparing authorities, or updating citations before filing.
Best use case
legal-research is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Guides legal research from issue framing through authority collection, jurisdiction scoping, source prioritization, synthesis, and pre-filing updates. Use when planning or auditing legal research, building a research trail, developing rule statements, comparing authorities, or updating citations before filing.
Teams using legal-research should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/legal-research/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How legal-research Compares
| Feature / Agent | legal-research | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Guides legal research from issue framing through authority collection, jurisdiction scoping, source prioritization, synthesis, and pre-filing updates. Use when planning or auditing legal research, building a research trail, developing rule statements, comparing authorities, or updating citations before filing.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Legal Research Repeatable workflow for researching a legal issue, prioritizing controlling authority, and documenting a filing-ready research trail. Use this skill for the overall research process. Use `authority-verification` when the task specifically requires citation verification, source retrieval, or case.dev-based authority checks. ## Quick Start 1. Frame the legal question as one issue at a time. 2. Identify jurisdiction, court level, and governing instruments. 3. Collect primary authority first. 4. Expand to persuasive and secondary authority only where needed. 5. Synthesize the rule, competing authorities, and factual application. 6. Recheck authorities immediately before filing. ## Core Workflow ### 1. Frame the issue Define: - legal question - elements or standards - requested relief - factual assumptions that matter to the answer ### 2. Scope the forum Identify: - governing jurisdiction - controlling court level - procedural posture - any local rules or standing orders that affect the analysis ### 3. Collect primary authority Start with: - constitutions - statutes - regulations - controlling cases - local rules ### 4. Expand outward Use persuasive authority and secondary sources to: - fill doctrinal gaps - compare competing approaches - confirm terminology - identify additional primary sources ### 5. Synthesize Produce: - rule statement - authority hierarchy - factual analogies - risks, splits, and counterarguments - open questions requiring more research ### 6. Update before filing Before relying on the work product: - recheck the controlling authorities - confirm current statutory and regulatory text - confirm local rules - record the date of the final update ## Research Trail Always preserve: - search query or issue label - source consulted - why the source matters - jurisdiction and court level - date checked - unresolved questions ## Pitfalls - Starting with secondary sources and never tracing back to primary authority. - Mixing binding and persuasive authority without labeling the difference. - Ignoring procedural posture or standard of review. - Omitting adverse authority. - Treating stale research as filing-ready.
Related Skills
writing-grant-applications-research
Structures NIH/foundation grant applications with specific aims, significance, and innovation sections. Use when writing research grants, preparing NIH applications, or structuring grant proposals.
managing-research-compliance
Monitors research compliance with federal regulations (21 CFR, 45 CFR 46) and institutional policies. Use when ensuring research compliance, managing regulatory requirements, or conducting compliance reviews.
managing-informed-consent-research
Structures research consent documentation with required elements and vulnerable population protections. Use when creating research consents, managing consent processes, or documenting informed consent.
managing-adverse-event-reporting-research
Documents research adverse events with causality assessment and regulatory reporting timelines. Use when reporting research AEs, assessing causality, or managing safety reporting.
conducting-health-economics-research
Structures cost-effectiveness and health economic analyses with QALY calculations and model validation. Use when conducting health economics research, calculating QALYs, or building economic models.
legal-strategy-summary
Generates structured litigation strategy summaries synthesizing case facts, legal arguments, procedural tactics, and risk assessments into a unified roadmap. Use when aligning legal teams on case direction, preparing for strategy meetings, or onboarding stakeholders to litigation matters.
legal-research-summary
Synthesizes U.S. statutes, case law, and regulatory guidance into attorney-ready litigation research summaries with counterarguments and strategic implications. Use when drafting research memos, case law surveys, statutory/regulatory synthesis, or answering "what is the law on X" questions. Trigger keywords: legal research summary, research memo, case law survey, statutory analysis, regulatory guidance, legal landscape.
legal-opinion-letter
Drafts formal legal opinion letters for corporate and transactional matters with jurisdiction-specific analysis, calibrated conclusion language, and comprehensive qualifications. Use when drafting closing opinion letters, third-party reliance opinions, enforceability opinions, or corporate authority opinions for mergers, acquisitions, financings, or regulatory compliance.
legal-letter
Drafts professional legal letters for personal injury litigation including settlement demands, cease-and-desist, notice letters, and response correspondence. Tailors tone by recipient type. Use when drafting demand letters, pre-suit correspondence, insurance claim letters, cease-and-desist notices, or litigation response letters.
legal-article-summary
Produces structured summaries of legal scholarship capturing thesis, methodology, key authorities, arguments, and significance. Use when summarizing law review articles, journal articles, case notes, or scholarship for research triage, case preparation, literature reviews, or CLE.
writing-equity-research-notes
Creates structured equity research notes with thesis, valuation, risks, and rating justification. Use when initiating coverage, updating research opinions, or writing investment notes.
skill-name
Replace with a specific description of what this skill does and when to use it. Include keywords that help agents identify relevant tasks.