Legal skills for Claude, compared
A file-by-file comparison of legal skills for Claude: what each skill contains, what it produces, and what its published files say about sources and review.
These projects solve different parts of a legal-document workflow. The comparison below is based on the published skill files and references identified by name, not on assumptions about what a model might generate beyond those instructions.
The practical distinction
Open Agreements is template-assembly tooling. Its agreement skills produce review-ready DOCX drafts from named standard forms. The underlying forms include material from Common Paper, Bonterms, YC, and NVCA, the accompanying legal guides cite primary law, and the material is reviewed by Steven Obiajulu, J.D., an attorney admitted in New York — named so a reader who wants to confirm the review can reach him directly rather than take an anonymous label on faith.
wshobson's employment-contract-templates is prompt and reference content. Its skill file points to a Markdown reference containing an offer-letter example, an employment-agreement example, and an employee-handbook section. The reviewed files do not package standalone DOCX template documents.
claude-office-skills' contract-review and contract-template cover two workflows. The first defines a Markdown contract-review report. The second explains how to build an Accord Project template with TemplateMark, Concerto, and Ergo files. Its metadata declares DOCX-related MCP tools, but the skill does not define DOCX as its output.
Anthropic's vendor-agreement-review is a review workflow. It compares a supplied vendor agreement with a team's configured playbook, produces a review memo, and can request a separate docx skill for a tracked-changes redline. It does not present itself as a contract-template library.
How to read “not stated”
“Not stated” is not a negative rating. It means the reviewed file does not identify that fact. In particular, instructions to consult a lawyer are not the same as a statement that a lawyer reviewed the published skill.
Install counts are a snapshot from July 22, 2026 and will change. Product contents can change as their repositories are updated.
This comparison is for developers and legal practitioners evaluating workflow tooling. It does not assess whether any generated document is suitable for a specific transaction or jurisdiction.
| Published detail | Open Agreements skills | wshobson employment-contract-templates | claude-office-skills contract-review + contract-template | Anthropic vendor-agreement-review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
What the reviewed files contain
Whether the published material is a workflow prompt, template text, or access to template documents |
Skill instructions plus access to standard-form template documents and legal guides | A 64-line skill file plus a 461-line reference file with three Markdown examples: an offer letter, employment agreement, and handbook section | Two instruction files: a 466-line contract-review guide and a 265-line Accord Project template-building guide with examples | A 343-line vendor-agreement review workflow that applies a configured team playbook; it is not a template library |
|
Output format
The output expressly described by the reviewed files |
Signable Word DOCX draft for review | No file output specified; the examples are Markdown text | Review: Markdown report. Template: Accord Project files; DOCX MCP tools are declared, but DOCX is not specified as the template skill's output | Full review memo by default, a Slack-sized text summary, or—on request—a DOCX redline produced with a separate docx skill |
|
Named source forms
Published form sources, rather than a general statement that a template is standard |
Common Paper, Bonterms, YC, and NVCA standard forms | None named; the reference file supplies its own Markdown examples | No legal source form named; contract-template uses Accord Project structure and links to the Accord template library | None; it reviews the user's agreement against the team's configured playbook |
|
Law citations
How the reviewed material handles statutes, regulations, or cases |
Accompanying legal guides cite primary law | No statute, regulation, case, or primary-law link in the reviewed skill and reference files | contract-review names California Labor Code 2870 in an example; no linked primary-law citation appears in either reviewed file | Names statutes and requires source tags; its jurisdiction examples are marked '[jurisdiction — verify]' |
|
Review provenance
Whether the publisher states who reviewed the material |
Reviewed by Steven Obiajulu, J.D., an attorney admitted in New York who practiced law for six years. Profile: openagreements.org/editors/steven-obiajulu | Not stated; the skill tells users to consult counsel and have documents reviewed | Not stated; contract-review says it cannot replace professional legal review | Not stated in the reviewed skill file; the workflow is written for lawyer review and includes gates for non-lawyers |
|
License
License text present in the reviewed skill files |
services-agreement skill: Apache-2.0; its templates: CC-BY-4.0 or CC0-1.0, depending on the author | Not stated in the reviewed skill and reference files | MIT for both reviewed skills | Not stated in the reviewed skill file |
|
Installs as of July 2026
Captured from skills.sh search results on July 22, 2026; counts can change |
services-agreement 80; open-agreements 74; data-privacy-agreement 56; cloud-service-agreement 44; edit-docx-agreement 43 | 8.1K | contract-review 4.2K; contract-template 4K | 373 |
Want Claude tooling that produces a DOCX draft from a standard form?
Explore Open Agreements