360 Secure SkillHub
360 安全技能中心

Redline

通过 Python 脚本 init-review 初始化审阅 JSON,逐段填写 favorability、risk_level、risk_summary、why_it_matters、proposed_replacement 等字段并回复对手方评论,再运行 materialize 生成带修订痕迹的合同 DOCX、风险报告 DOCX 和 .review.json 审阅数据集,重点关注隐私、安全、…

chipmunkrpa
chipmunkrpa
热度 87.48
最近更新 2026-05-11 17:32:16
分类:效率依赖:代码执行 / 读写文件 / 内部调用大模型应用场景:法律文档 / 报告撰写 / 校对润色

安装技能

复制下面的话术发给你的 Agent,它会通过 secure-skills 检索并安装该技能。

执行命令安装此 skill: npx secure-skills-cli add redline-contract
Metadata
name
redline
description
Review and redline DOCX contracts paragraph by paragraph with tracked changes, clause-level risk analysis, and draft comment responses. Use when a user wants contract revisions that are specific to each paragraph or bullet, especially for privacy, security, data-processing, liability, AI, or other negotiated legal terms.

Redline

Overview

Use this skill to review contract .docx files at paragraph level and generate:

  • a tracked-changes amended .docx
  • a risk-report .docx
  • a .review.json review dataset

Do not collapse multiple operative paragraphs into one generic comment. Each non-empty paragraph or bullet must be reviewed on its own merits, with distinct risk analysis and replacement language where needed.

Workflow

  1. Confirm the supported party and the priority risk areas.
  2. Run scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py init-review for each source .docx.
  3. Review the generated .review.json paragraph by paragraph.
  4. For each clauses[] entry, write a specific assessment tied to that paragraph only:
    • favorability
    • risk_level
    • risk_summary
    • why_it_matters
    • proposed_replacement
  5. Draft specific responses for any opponent comments in opponent_comments[].
  6. Run materialize to create the amended .docx and risk report .docx.
  7. Verify the outputs exist and the tracked changes are readable.

Required Review Standard

  • Treat each review unit as one paragraph-level issue, not a whole section summary.
  • Do not reuse the same replacement text across unrelated paragraphs.
  • If several bullets in the same section have different obligations, analyze and redraft them separately.
  • Keep replacement language narrow and operational. Match the exact risk in the source paragraph.
  • When reviewing privacy and security language, check for:
    • uncapped or super-capped liability exposure
    • audit overreach
    • subprocessor approval friction
    • cross-border transfer restrictions
    • incident notification deadlines
    • certifications, penetration testing, and customer testing rights
    • unilateral policy updates
    • AI/security terms that exceed the actual service model

Commands

Initialize a review file:

python scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py init-review \
  --input <contract.docx> \
  --output <contract.review.json> \
  --supported-party "<party>" \
  --focus-area "<area-1>" \
  --focus-area "<area-2>" \
  --opponent-comment-author "<author-1>"

Materialize the outputs:

python scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py materialize \
  --input <contract.docx> \
  --review-json <contract.review.json> \
  --amended-output <contract.amended.docx> \
  --report-output <contract.risk-report.docx> \
  --author "Codex Redline Reviewer"

Resources

  • JSON field details: references/review-json-schema.md
  • Main tool: scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py