界面已本地化;技能介绍与说明文档按所选语言由 AI 自动翻译,代码、命令、路径和专业术语保留原文,以原作者文档为准。
探索技能
数据与研究 · SKILL.md

risk-analysis

risk-analysis

【数据与研究】Generates structured risk analysis summaries for legal matters, identifying and evaluating risks by severity and likelihood with quantified exposures and mitigation strategies. Use when preparing risk assessments, exposure analyses, liability summaries, or pre-filing risk evaluations across litigation, regulatory, contractual, reputational, and opera…

独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准

技能说明

GitHub

name: risk-analysis language: en description: Generates structured risk analysis summaries for legal matters, identifying and evaluating risks by severity and likelihood with quantified exposures and mitigation strategies. Use when preparing risk assessments, exposure analyses, liability summaries, or pre-filing risk evaluations across litigation, regulatory, contractual, reputational, and operational domains.

Risk Analysis Summary

Produces a prioritized risk analysis from matter documents, quantifying exposures and recommending mitigations for attorneys, clients, and stakeholders.

Prerequisites

  1. Matter documents — contracts, pleadings, correspondence, regulatory filings, insurance policies
  2. Matter context — jurisdiction, industry, phase (pre-filing / active / settlement), key parties
  3. Risk tolerance — if known, acceptable exposure thresholds or strategic constraints

Workflow

1. Executive Overview

  • Matter snapshot — one-paragraph factual summary
  • Top 3–5 risks — ranked by severity × likelihood, one sentence each with estimated exposure
  • Immediate actions — time-sensitive deadlines, SOL dates, regulatory windows

2. Risk Register

Assign each risk a sequential ID (R-01, R-02, ...) and complete:

FieldContent
CategoryContractual / Regulatory / Litigation / Financial / Reputational / Operational
DescriptionSpecific risk statement grounded in document evidence
Factual basisCite provisions, regulatory sections, correspondence, or facts
Legal authorityStatutes, regulations, case law — mark [VERIFY] if uncertain
LikelihoodHigh / Medium / Low with reasoning
SeverityCritical / Major / Moderate / Minor
Financial exposureBest-case / most-likely / worst-case range
Non-monetary impactReputational harm, sanctions, operational disruption
Mitigating factorsDefenses, insurance coverage, factual counterarguments
InterdependenciesOther risk IDs that compound or conflict

3. Risk Matrix

Plot risk IDs on a 3×3 severity (rows) × likelihood (columns) grid:

              │ Low            │ Medium         │ High
──────────────┼────────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────
Critical      │                │                │
Major         │                │                │
Moderate      │                │                │

4. Mitigation Strategies

For each risk rated Major/High or above:

  • Action — specific, practical step
  • Type — Legal defense / Procedural / Settlement / Insurance / Operational
  • Feasibility — High / Medium / Low
  • Effectiveness — estimated exposure reduction
  • Resources — cost, time, personnel
  • Trade-offs — whether this mitigation exacerbates another risk

5. Timeline

PriorityRisk IDActionDeadline/TriggerOwner
Urgent
Near-term (30–90 days)
Strategic (90+ days)

Flag all hard deadlines: statutes of limitations, cure periods, regulatory filing dates.

6. Information Gaps

List areas needing additional investigation, discovery, or expert consultation to refine the assessment.

Pitfalls

  • Ungrounded risks — every risk must cite specific documents or facts; never assert risk in the abstract
  • Missing quantification — provide dollar ranges with stated assumptions; flag estimates as conservative or aggressive
  • Fact vs. inference — clearly distinguish established facts, reasonable inferences, and speculative scenarios
  • Tone imbalance — neither minimize genuine risks nor catastrophize manageable exposures
  • Audience mismatch — use language accessible to business stakeholders; define legal terms on first use
  • Unacknowledged uncertainty — state confidence levels; identify what additional information would change the assessment
  • Ignored interdependencies — flag where addressing one risk may worsen another
  • Jurisdiction blindness — note where analysis depends on forum, governing law, or regulatory body
我的收藏