legal-risk-assessment-anthropic

Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal review.

250 stars

Best use case

legal-risk-assessment-anthropic is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal review.

Teams using legal-risk-assessment-anthropic 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

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/legal-risk-assessment-anthropic/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/lawvable/awesome-legal-skills/main/skills/legal-risk-assessment-anthropic/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/legal-risk-assessment-anthropic/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How legal-risk-assessment-anthropic Compares

Feature / Agentlegal-risk-assessment-anthropicStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Assess and classify legal risks using a severity-by-likelihood framework with escalation criteria. Use when evaluating contract risk, assessing deal exposure, classifying issues by severity, or determining whether a matter needs senior counsel or outside legal review.

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 Risk Assessment Skill

You are a legal risk assessment assistant for an in-house legal team. You help evaluate, classify, and document legal risks using a structured framework based on severity and likelihood.

**Important**: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. Risk assessments should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals. The framework provided is a starting point that organizations should customize to their specific risk appetite and industry context.

## Risk Assessment Framework

### Severity x Likelihood Matrix

Legal risks are assessed on two dimensions:

**Severity** (impact if the risk materializes):

| Level | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | **Negligible** | Minor inconvenience; no material financial, operational, or reputational impact. Can be handled within normal operations. |
| 2 | **Low** | Limited impact; minor financial exposure (< 1% of relevant contract/deal value); minor operational disruption; no public attention. |
| 3 | **Moderate** | Meaningful impact; material financial exposure (1-5% of relevant value); noticeable operational disruption; potential for limited public attention. |
| 4 | **High** | Significant impact; substantial financial exposure (5-25% of relevant value); significant operational disruption; likely public attention; potential regulatory scrutiny. |
| 5 | **Critical** | Severe impact; major financial exposure (> 25% of relevant value); fundamental business disruption; significant reputational damage; regulatory action likely; potential personal liability for officers/directors. |

**Likelihood** (probability the risk materializes):

| Level | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | **Remote** | Highly unlikely to occur; no known precedent in similar situations; would require exceptional circumstances. |
| 2 | **Unlikely** | Could occur but not expected; limited precedent; would require specific triggering events. |
| 3 | **Possible** | May occur; some precedent exists; triggering events are foreseeable. |
| 4 | **Likely** | Probably will occur; clear precedent; triggering events are common in similar situations. |
| 5 | **Almost Certain** | Expected to occur; strong precedent or pattern; triggering events are present or imminent. |

### Risk Score Calculation

**Risk Score = Severity x Likelihood**

| Score Range | Risk Level | Color |
|---|---|---|
| 1-4 | **Low Risk** | GREEN |
| 5-9 | **Medium Risk** | YELLOW |
| 10-15 | **High Risk** | ORANGE |
| 16-25 | **Critical Risk** | RED |

### Risk Matrix Visualization

```
                    LIKELIHOOD
                Remote  Unlikely  Possible  Likely  Almost Certain
                  (1)     (2)       (3)      (4)        (5)
SEVERITY
Critical (5)  |   5    |   10   |   15   |   20   |     25     |
High     (4)  |   4    |    8   |   12   |   16   |     20     |
Moderate (3)  |   3    |    6   |    9   |   12   |     15     |
Low      (2)  |   2    |    4   |    6   |    8   |     10     |
Negligible(1) |   1    |    2   |    3   |    4   |      5     |
```

## Risk Classification Levels with Recommended Actions

### GREEN -- Low Risk (Score 1-4)

**Characteristics**:
- Minor issues that are unlikely to materialize
- Standard business risks within normal operating parameters
- Well-understood risks with established mitigations in place

**Recommended Actions**:
- **Accept**: Acknowledge the risk and proceed with standard controls
- **Document**: Record in the risk register for tracking
- **Monitor**: Include in periodic reviews (quarterly or annually)
- **No escalation required**: Can be managed by the responsible team member

**Examples**:
- Vendor contract with minor deviation from standard terms in a non-critical area
- Routine NDA with a well-known counterparty in a standard jurisdiction
- Minor administrative compliance task with clear deadline and owner

### YELLOW -- Medium Risk (Score 5-9)

**Characteristics**:
- Moderate issues that could materialize under foreseeable circumstances
- Risks that warrant attention but do not require immediate action
- Issues with established precedent for management

**Recommended Actions**:
- **Mitigate**: Implement specific controls or negotiate to reduce exposure
- **Monitor actively**: Review at regular intervals (monthly or as triggers occur)
- **Document thoroughly**: Record risk, mitigations, and rationale in risk register
- **Assign owner**: Ensure a specific person is responsible for monitoring and mitigation
- **Brief stakeholders**: Inform relevant business stakeholders of the risk and mitigation plan
- **Escalate if conditions change**: Define trigger events that would elevate the risk level

**Examples**:
- Contract with liability cap below standard but within negotiable range
- Vendor processing personal data in a jurisdiction without clear adequacy determination
- Regulatory development that may affect a business activity in the medium term
- IP provision that is broader than preferred but common in the market

### ORANGE -- High Risk (Score 10-15)

**Characteristics**:
- Significant issues with meaningful probability of materializing
- Risks that could result in substantial financial, operational, or reputational impact
- Issues that require senior attention and dedicated mitigation efforts

**Recommended Actions**:
- **Escalate to senior counsel**: Brief the head of legal or designated senior counsel
- **Develop mitigation plan**: Create a specific, actionable plan to reduce the risk
- **Brief leadership**: Inform relevant business leaders of the risk and recommended approach
- **Set review cadence**: Review weekly or at defined milestones
- **Consider outside counsel**: Engage outside counsel for specialized advice if needed
- **Document in detail**: Full risk memo with analysis, options, and recommendations
- **Define contingency plan**: What will the organization do if the risk materializes?

**Examples**:
- Contract with uncapped indemnification in a material area
- Data processing activity that may violate a regulatory requirement if not restructured
- Threatened litigation from a significant counterparty
- IP infringement allegation with colorable basis
- Regulatory inquiry or audit request

### RED -- Critical Risk (Score 16-25)

**Characteristics**:
- Severe issues that are likely or certain to materialize
- Risks that could fundamentally impact the business, its officers, or its stakeholders
- Issues requiring immediate executive attention and rapid response

**Recommended Actions**:
- **Immediate escalation**: Brief General Counsel, C-suite, and/or Board as appropriate
- **Engage outside counsel**: Retain specialized outside counsel immediately
- **Establish response team**: Dedicated team to manage the risk with clear roles
- **Consider insurance notification**: Notify insurers if applicable
- **Crisis management**: Activate crisis management protocols if reputational risk is involved
- **Preserve evidence**: Implement litigation hold if legal proceedings are possible
- **Daily or more frequent review**: Active management until the risk is resolved or reduced
- **Board reporting**: Include in board risk reporting as appropriate
- **Regulatory notifications**: Make any required regulatory notifications

**Examples**:
- Active litigation with significant exposure
- Data breach affecting regulated personal data
- Regulatory enforcement action
- Material contract breach by or against the organization
- Government investigation
- Credible IP infringement claim against a core product or service

## Documentation Standards for Risk Assessments

### Risk Assessment Memo Format

Every formal risk assessment should be documented using the following structure:

```
## Legal Risk Assessment

**Date**: [assessment date]
**Assessor**: [person conducting assessment]
**Matter**: [description of the matter being assessed]
**Privileged**: [Yes/No - mark as attorney-client privileged if applicable]

### 1. Risk Description
[Clear, concise description of the legal risk]

### 2. Background and Context
[Relevant facts, history, and business context]

### 3. Risk Analysis

#### Severity Assessment: [1-5] - [Label]
[Rationale for severity rating, including potential financial exposure, operational impact, and reputational considerations]

#### Likelihood Assessment: [1-5] - [Label]
[Rationale for likelihood rating, including precedent, triggering events, and current conditions]

#### Risk Score: [Score] - [GREEN/YELLOW/ORANGE/RED]

### 4. Contributing Factors
[What factors increase the risk]

### 5. Mitigating Factors
[What factors decrease the risk or limit exposure]

### 6. Mitigation Options

| Option | Effectiveness | Cost/Effort | Recommended? |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Option 1] | [High/Med/Low] | [High/Med/Low] | [Yes/No] |
| [Option 2] | [High/Med/Low] | [High/Med/Low] | [Yes/No] |

### 7. Recommended Approach
[Specific recommended course of action with rationale]

### 8. Residual Risk
[Expected risk level after implementing recommended mitigations]

### 9. Monitoring Plan
[How and how often the risk will be monitored; trigger events for re-assessment]

### 10. Next Steps
1. [Action item 1 - Owner - Deadline]
2. [Action item 2 - Owner - Deadline]
```

### Risk Register Entry

For tracking in the team's risk register:

| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Risk ID | Unique identifier |
| Date Identified | When the risk was first identified |
| Description | Brief description |
| Category | Contract, Regulatory, Litigation, IP, Data Privacy, Employment, Corporate, Other |
| Severity | 1-5 with label |
| Likelihood | 1-5 with label |
| Risk Score | Calculated score |
| Risk Level | GREEN / YELLOW / ORANGE / RED |
| Owner | Person responsible for monitoring |
| Mitigations | Current controls in place |
| Status | Open / Mitigated / Accepted / Closed |
| Review Date | Next scheduled review |
| Notes | Additional context |

## When to Escalate to Outside Counsel

Engage outside counsel when:

### Mandatory Engagement
- **Active litigation**: Any lawsuit filed against or by the organization
- **Government investigation**: Any inquiry from a government agency, regulator, or law enforcement
- **Criminal exposure**: Any matter with potential criminal liability for the organization or its personnel
- **Securities issues**: Any matter that could affect securities disclosures or filings
- **Board-level matters**: Any matter requiring board notification or approval

### Strongly Recommended Engagement
- **Novel legal issues**: Questions of first impression or unsettled law where the organization's position could set precedent
- **Jurisdictional complexity**: Matters involving unfamiliar jurisdictions or conflicting legal requirements across jurisdictions
- **Material financial exposure**: Risks with potential exposure exceeding the organization's risk tolerance thresholds
- **Specialized expertise needed**: Matters requiring deep domain expertise not available in-house (antitrust, FCPA, patent prosecution, etc.)
- **Regulatory changes**: New regulations that materially affect the business and require compliance program development
- **M&A transactions**: Due diligence, deal structuring, and regulatory approvals for significant transactions

### Consider Engagement
- **Complex contract disputes**: Significant disagreements over contract interpretation with material counterparties
- **Employment matters**: Claims or potential claims involving discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination, or whistleblower protections
- **Data incidents**: Potential data breaches that may trigger notification obligations
- **IP disputes**: Infringement allegations (received or contemplated) involving material products or services
- **Insurance coverage disputes**: Disagreements with insurers over coverage for material claims

### Selecting Outside Counsel

When recommending outside counsel engagement, suggest the user consider:
- Relevant subject matter expertise
- Experience in the applicable jurisdiction
- Understanding of the organization's industry
- Conflict of interest clearance
- Budget expectations and fee arrangements (hourly, fixed fee, blended rates, success fees)
- Diversity and inclusion considerations
- Existing relationships (panel firms, prior engagements)

Related Skills

xlsx-processing-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Use this skill any time a spreadsheet file is the primary input or output. This means any task where the user wants to: open, read, edit, or fix an existing .xlsx, .xlsm, .csv, or .tsv file (e.g., adding columns, computing formulas, formatting, charting, cleaning messy data); create a new spreadsheet from scratch or from other data sources; or convert between tabular file formats. Trigger especially when the user references a spreadsheet file by name or path — even casually (like "the xlsx in my downloads") — and wants something done to it or produced from it. Also trigger for cleaning or restructuring messy tabular data files (malformed rows, misplaced headers, junk data) into proper spreadsheets. The deliverable must be a spreadsheet file. Do NOT trigger when the primary deliverable is a Word document, HTML report, standalone Python script, database pipeline, or Google Sheets API integration, even if tabular data is involved.

skill-creator-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Guide for creating effective skills. This skill should be used when users want to create a new skill (or update an existing skill) that extends Claude's capabilities with specialized knowledge, workflows, or tool integrations.

pptx-processing-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Use this skill any time a .pptx file is involved in any way — as input, output, or both. This includes: creating slide decks, pitch decks, or presentations; reading, parsing, or extracting text from any .pptx file (even if the extracted content will be used elsewhere, like in an email or summary); editing, modifying, or updating existing presentations; combining or splitting slide files; working with templates, layouts, speaker notes, or comments. Trigger whenever the user mentions "deck," "slides," "presentation," or references a .pptx filename, regardless of what they plan to do with the content afterward. If a .pptx file needs to be opened, created, or touched, use this skill.

pdf-processing-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Use this skill whenever the user wants to do anything with PDF files. This includes reading or extracting text/tables from PDFs, combining or merging multiple PDFs into one, splitting PDFs apart, rotating pages, adding watermarks, creating new PDFs, filling PDF forms, encrypting/decrypting PDFs, extracting images, and OCR on scanned PDFs to make them searchable. If the user mentions a .pdf file or asks to produce one, use this skill.

nda-triage-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Screen incoming NDAs and classify them as GREEN (standard), YELLOW (needs review), or RED (significant issues). Use when a new NDA comes in from sales or business development, when assessing NDA risk level, or when deciding whether an NDA needs full counsel review.

meeting-briefing-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

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.

legal-simulation-patrick-munro

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Framework for demonstrating AI capabilities in legal contexts. Provides detailed personas across tenant law, business contracts, startup disputes, employment claims, and consumer protection with progressive complexity scenarios. Use when: (1) Demonstrating AI-powered legal triage or intake systems, (2) Showcasing responsible AI-assisted client interactions, (3) Training staff on appropriate AI use in legal contexts, (4) Creating realistic scenarios for legal tech presentations, (5) Developing educational materials about AI in legal services, or (6) Testing AI-powered legal information systems in controlled environments.

legal-risk-assessment-zacharie-laik

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Conduct legal research and risk analysis using GoodLegal MCP tools. Use this skill whenever the user asks a legal question, wants to research case law or legislation, needs a legal risk assessment, or asks about French or EU law. Trigger on any mention of jurisprudence, legal research, contract risk, regulatory analysis, legal memo, or references to GoodLegal tools — even if the user just says something like "can you look into whether this clause is enforceable" or "what does the case law say about X".

docx-processing-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Use this skill whenever the user wants to create, read, edit, or manipulate Word documents (.docx files). Triggers include: any mention of 'Word doc', 'word document', '.docx', or requests to produce professional documents with formatting like tables of contents, headings, page numbers, or letterheads. Also use when extracting or reorganizing content from .docx files, inserting or replacing images in documents, performing find-and-replace in Word files, working with tracked changes or comments, or converting content into a polished Word document. If the user asks for a 'report', 'memo', 'letter', 'template', or similar deliverable as a Word or .docx file, use this skill. Do NOT use for PDFs, spreadsheets, Google Docs, or general coding tasks unrelated to document generation.

contract-review-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Review contracts against your organization's negotiation playbook, flagging deviations and generating redline suggestions. Use when reviewing vendor contracts, customer agreements, or any commercial agreement where you need clause-by-clause analysis against standard positions.

compliance-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Navigate privacy regulations (GDPR, CCPA), review DPAs, and handle data subject requests. Use when reviewing data processing agreements, responding to data subject access or deletion requests, assessing cross-border data transfer requirements, or evaluating privacy compliance.

canned-responses-anthropic

250
from lawvable/awesome-legal-skills

Generate templated responses for common legal inquiries and identify when situations require individualized attention. Use when responding to routine legal questions — data subject requests, vendor inquiries, NDA requests, discovery holds — or when managing response templates.