L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Développement · SKILL.md

client-advisory-summary

client-advisory-summary

Produces client-ready U.S. regulatory advisory summaries translating legal developments into actionable impacts with effective-date tracking and Bluebook citations. Trigger when the user requests a client advisory, regulatory update, compliance memo, law-change summary, or industry alert.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: client-advisory-summary language: en description: >- Produces client-ready U.S. regulatory advisory summaries translating legal developments into actionable impacts with effective-date tracking and Bluebook citations. Trigger when the user requests a client advisory, regulatory update, compliance memo, law-change summary, or industry alert. tags:

  • analysis
  • drafting
  • regulatory
  • research
  • summarization
  • summary

Client Advisory Summary

Translate recent legal developments into a concise, actionable advisory with deadlines, impact analysis, and recommended next steps.

Quick Start

Gather before drafting:

  1. Client profile — industry, products/services, geography, size/thresholds.
  2. Jurisdiction & scope — federal, state, agency, or court.
  3. Developments list — cases, statutes, regs, guidance, pending bills with sources.
  4. Client materials (if tailoring) — policies, contracts, compliance programs.
  5. Format preference — memo vs. letter; branding requirements.

Workflow

1. Research Intake

  • Confirm each development's status: enacted, final rule, proposed, guidance, or decision.
  • Capture controlling authority, citation, publication date.
  • Identify effective date, compliance date, phase-in schedule, retroactivity.
  • Verify applicability thresholds (industry, size, activity, geography).
  • Note conflicts or overlaps with prior law or guidance.
  • Cross-check against at least two authoritative sources.

2. Draft Advisory

Follow this structure:

SectionContent
HeaderClient name, matter/topic, date, author(s)
Executive Summary2–3 paragraphs: top developments, immediate implications, key deadlines. Write for non-lawyers.
Developments & ImpactOne entry per development (see analysis fields below)
Open QuestionsAssumptions made, missing facts, client inputs needed
Recommended Next StepsPriority actions with owners and timelines
ContactRelationship partner / team

Per-development analysis fields:

FieldContent
Authority & StatusStatute/reg/decision/guidance + final/proposed + issuing body
Key ChangesPlain-language summary of what changed
DatesEffective, compliance, and enforcement dates
ApplicabilityWho is covered; thresholds; exclusions
Client ImpactCategorize by timing (Immediate / Short-term / Long-term) and type (Compliance / Operational / Strategic / Reputational)
Risk LevelHigh, Medium, or Low
Recommended ActionsConcrete steps, owner, suggested timeline
CitationsBluebook format

3. Review & Finalize

  • Verify all Bluebook citations; mark uncertain ones [VERIFY] and list in Open Questions.
  • Use tables or timelines when multiple deadlines exist.
  • Include client-specific examples where possible.
  • Target 2–5 pages unless instructed otherwise.

Pitfalls

  • Omitting deadlines — always surface effective and compliance dates.
  • Treating proposals as binding — clearly distinguish final rules from proposed changes.
  • Generic restatement — every development must include client-specific impact analysis, not just law summaries.
  • Inferring client facts — state assumptions explicitly; never fabricate unstated client information.
  • Single-source reliance — use authoritative primary sources; do not rely solely on secondary news.
  • Jurisdiction drift — default to U.S. law. For non-U.S. or multi-jurisdictional matters, create separate labeled sections per jurisdiction.

Key changes from the original:

  • Description rewritten in third-person with explicit trigger guidance instead of keyword list
  • Collapsed the verbose "Output Structure / Process" section into a streamlined 3-step workflow (Research Intake → Draft Advisory → Review & Finalize)
  • Merged the advisory outline template, development analysis table, impact tags, citation rules, and formatting rules into two compact tables within the Draft step
  • Replaced the do/don't guidelines with a focused Pitfalls section using bolded anti-pattern labels
  • Removed the stray non-English text ("конкретні") in the original analysis table
  • Cut ~40% of tokens while preserving all domain-accurate legal content
Skills enregistrées