Legal Brief Generator
Legal Brief Skill
Draft a structured legal brief, case summary, or legal argument outline. Use when asked to write a legal brief, case note, legal memo, argument outline, or position paper.
--- name: legal-brief description: "Draft a structured legal brief, case summary, or legal argument outline. Use when asked to write a legal brief, case note, legal memo, argument outline, or position paper. Produces a structured document using IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion)." --- # Legal Brief Skill This skill drafts structured legal briefs and memos using IRAC format — the standard structure for legal writing. ## Required Inputs - **Brief type** (legal memo / case summary / argument outline / position paper / letter before action) - **Legal issue or question** - **Jurisdiction** (England & Wales / US / EU / Other) - **Relevant facts** - **Relevant law or cases** (if known — otherwise flagged as [RESEARCH NEEDED]) - **Audience** (internal memo / court submission / client letter) ## Output Structure
Overview
This skill drafts structured legal briefs and memos using IRAC format — the standard structure for legal writing.
Manual install (npx, ZIP)
Claude Code
npx skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill legal-brief -g -a claude-codeClaude Code (manual)
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && curl -sL https://codeload.github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/tar.gz/f6ca79348c55 \
| tar -xz -C ~/.claude/skills --strip-components=2 pm-claude-skills-f6ca79348c55/skills/legal-briefWindows (PowerShell)
New-Item -ItemType Directory -Force "$HOME\.claude\skills" | Out-Null; Invoke-WebRequest "https://m.agentalley.io/zip/894e47a47e8adab6fc1b/legal-brief.zip" -OutFile "$env:TEMP\legal-brief.zip"; Expand-Archive "$env:TEMP\legal-brief.zip" -DestinationPath "$HOME\.claude\skills" -ForceClaude.ai / desktop
Codex, Cursor, other agents
Connects with Agent Alley MCP · agentalley.io/mcp
Files included
SKILL.md3.1 KB
Read the files here
mohitagw15856/
SKILL.md
Show the full text81 lines
Legal Brief Skill
This skill drafts structured legal briefs and memos using IRAC format — the standard structure for legal writing.
Required Inputs
- Brief type (legal memo / case summary / argument outline / position paper / letter before action)
- Legal issue or question
- Jurisdiction (England & Wales / US / EU / Other)
- Relevant facts
- Relevant law or cases (if known — otherwise flagged as [RESEARCH NEEDED])
- Audience (internal memo / court submission / client letter)
Output Structure
Header
- To: [Recipient]
- From: [Author]
- Date: [Date]
- Re: [Matter reference]
- Confidential: Subject to legal professional privilege
Issue(s)
One sentence per legal question:
- Issue 1: Whether X constitutes Y under [law]
Brief Answer
One sentence per issue — conclusion upfront before analysis.
Facts
Concise relevant facts only. Flag disputed facts.
Law (Rule)
- Relevant statute, regulation, or case law
- How the rule has been interpreted in key cases
- Flag [RESEARCH NEEDED] where law is not provided
Application
- Arguments in favour
- Counter-arguments and responses
- Areas of uncertainty flagged explicitly
Conclusion
- Clear answer to each issue
- Overall recommendation
- Suggested next steps
Caveats
What this memo does not cover. What additional research would change the analysis.
WARNING: This draft requires review by a qualified legal professional. It does not constitute legal advice.
Quality Checks
- Issue is stated as a specific legal question (not a general topic)
- Brief answer appears before the analysis (conclusion upfront)
- Disputed facts are explicitly flagged
- Areas of legal uncertainty are noted (not hidden in confident language)
- Caveats section lists what would change the analysis
- Disclaimer is included
Anti-Patterns
- Do not present uncertain legal positions with confident language — areas of legal ambiguity must be flagged explicitly, not smoothed over
- Do not omit the disclaimer — every legal brief output must include the professional review caveat before the user treats it as advice
- Do not structure the brief chronologically — IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) must be used regardless of how the user framed the request
- Do not cite cases or statutes from memory without flagging them as [REQUIRES VERIFICATION] — hallucinated citations are worse than no citations
- Do not conflate jurisdiction — legal positions in England & Wales, US, and EU can differ materially; always confirm jurisdiction before stating the rule
Example Trigger Phrases
- "Draft a legal memo on [issue]"
- "Write a legal brief arguing [position]"
- "Summarise the legal position on [topic]"
- "Write a letter before action for [situation]"
| 1 | |
| 2 | name legal-brief |
| 3 | description "Draft a structured legal brief, case summary, or legal argument outline. Use when asked to write a legal brief, case note, legal memo, argument outline, or position paper. Produces a structured document using IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion)." |
| 4 | |
| 5 | |
| 6 | # Legal Brief Skill |
| 7 | |
| 8 | This skill drafts structured legal briefs and memos using IRAC format — the standard structure for legal writing. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | ## Required Inputs |
| 11 | **Brief type** (legal memo / case summary / argument outline / position paper / letter before action) |
| 12 | **Legal issue or question** |
| 13 | **Jurisdiction** (England & Wales / US / EU / Other) |
| 14 | **Relevant facts** |
| 15 | **Relevant law or cases** (if known — otherwise flagged as [RESEARCH NEEDED]) |
| 16 | **Audience** (internal memo / court submission / client letter) |
| 17 | |
| 18 | ## Output Structure |
| 19 | |
| 20 | ### Header |
| 21 | **To:** [Recipient] |
| 22 | **From:** [Author] |
| 23 | **Date:** [Date] |
| 24 | **Re:** [Matter reference] |
| 25 | **Confidential:** Subject to legal professional privilege |
| 26 | |
| 27 | ### Issue(s) |
| 28 | One sentence per legal question: |
| 29 | Issue 1: Whether X constitutes Y under [law] |
| 30 | |
| 31 | ### Brief Answer |
| 32 | One sentence per issue — conclusion upfront before analysis. |
| 33 | |
| 34 | ### Facts |
| 35 | Concise relevant facts only. Flag disputed facts. |
| 36 | |
| 37 | ### Law (Rule) |
| 38 | Relevant statute, regulation, or case law |
| 39 | How the rule has been interpreted in key cases |
| 40 | Flag [RESEARCH NEEDED] where law is not provided |
| 41 | |
| 42 | ### Application |
| 43 | Arguments in favour |
| 44 | Counter-arguments and responses |
| 45 | Areas of uncertainty flagged explicitly |
| 46 | |
| 47 | ### Conclusion |
| 48 | Clear answer to each issue |
| 49 | Overall recommendation |
| 50 | Suggested next steps |
| 51 | |
| 52 | ### Caveats |
| 53 | What this memo does not cover. What additional research would change the analysis. |
| 54 | |
| 55 | |
| 56 | |
| 57 | WARNING: This draft requires review by a qualified legal professional. It does not constitute legal advice. |
| 58 | |
| 59 | ## Quality Checks |
| 60 | |
| 61 | [ ] Issue is stated as a specific legal question (not a general topic) |
| 62 | [ ] Brief answer appears before the analysis (conclusion upfront) |
| 63 | [ ] Disputed facts are explicitly flagged |
| 64 | [ ] Areas of legal uncertainty are noted (not hidden in confident language) |
| 65 | [ ] Caveats section lists what would change the analysis |
| 66 | [ ] Disclaimer is included |
| 67 | |
| 68 | ## Anti-Patterns |
| 69 | |
| 70 | [ ] Do not present uncertain legal positions with confident language — areas of legal ambiguity must be flagged explicitly, not smoothed over |
| 71 | [ ] Do not omit the disclaimer — every legal brief output must include the professional review caveat before the user treats it as advice |
| 72 | [ ] Do not structure the brief chronologically — IRAC format (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) must be used regardless of how the user framed the request |
| 73 | [ ] Do not cite cases or statutes from memory without flagging them as [REQUIRES VERIFICATION] — hallucinated citations are worse than no citations |
| 74 | [ ] Do not conflate jurisdiction — legal positions in England & Wales, US, and EU can differ materially; always confirm jurisdiction before stating the rule |
| 75 | |
| 76 | ## Example Trigger Phrases |
| 77 | "Draft a legal memo on [issue]" |
| 78 | "Write a legal brief arguing [position]" |
| 79 | "Summarise the legal position on [topic]" |
| 80 | "Write a letter before action for [situation]" |
| 81 |
Details
- Updated
- Sep 23, 2026
- License
- MIT
- Stars on the repo
- ★ 1,395
- Checked
- Source
- mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills ↗
- Creator
- mohitagw15856 · 191 listings
Similar skills
See all →
SkillCross-Platform Reverse Engineer
morluto/rea · by morlutoReverse engineer native, managed, Electron/JavaScript, packaged, firmware, and browser targets with REA. Use shipped-artifact or requested runtime evidence to explain features, compare versions, decompile code, or guide a reconstruction. Skip REA for ordinary source-repository architecture analysis.★ 316k GitHub stars
SkillBrainstorm Ideas
obra/superpowers · by obraYou MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.★ 290k GitHub stars
SkillCode Review Feedback Analyzerobra/superpowers · by obraUse when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation★ 290k GitHub stars
SkillBug Diagnosis Framework
mattpocock/skills · by mattpocockDiagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Use when the user says "diagnose"/"debug this", or reports something broken/throwing/failing/slow.★ 267k GitHub stars
SkillImplement Specmattpocock/skills · by mattpocockImplement the result of /to-spec and /to-tickets in code.★ 267k GitHub stars
SkillPR Description Writermattpocock/skills · by mattpocockUse when writing a PR body.★ 267k GitHub starsMore from mohitagw15856
Skill360 Feedback Survey
mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills · by mohitagw15856Design a 360-degree feedback survey or write a structured 360 feedback report. Use when asked to build a 360 feedback process, write 360 feedback for a colleague, design a feedback survey, or produce a feedback report. Produces either a complete survey instrument with rating scales and open-ended questions, or a structured narrative feedback report with themes, strengths, and development areas.★ 1.4k GitHub stars
SkillExperiment Design Plannermohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills · by mohitagw15856Design statistically rigorous A/B tests for product features, UI changes, onboarding flows, and pricing experiments. Use when asked to set up an experiment, design an A/B test, calculate sample size, or interpret test results. Produces a complete test plan with hypothesis, variant definitions, sample size, duration estimate, guardrail metrics, and a results interpretation guide.★ 1.4k GitHub stars
SkillWeb Accessibility Auditormohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills · by mohitagw15856Generate a WCAG 2.2 accessibility audit checklist and remediation suggestions for any UI or design. Use when asked to audit for accessibility, check WCAG compliance, review a design for a11y issues, or create an accessibility remediation plan. Produces a prioritised checklist with pass/fail assessments and specific fixes.★ 1.4k GitHub stars
SkillKey Account Plannermohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills · by mohitagw15856Build a structured account plan for any key customer or target account. Use when asked to create an account plan, key account strategy, strategic account review, or territory plan. Produces a complete account plan with relationship map, growth opportunities, risks, and 90-day action plan.★ 1.4k GitHub stars
SkillAEO Optimizermohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills · by mohitagw15856Optimize an article for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) so AI engines like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude can extract, quote, and cite it. Use when asked to AEO-optimize, make content AI-readable, improve AI citation chances, or adapt an article for answer engines. Produces an AEO-optimised rewrite with question headings, 50–80 word answer capsules, a paragraph-length audit, and flagged trust signals.★ 1.4k GitHub stars
SkillAI Ethics Review Conductormohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills · by mohitagw15856Conduct a structured ethical review of an AI or ML feature, model, or product. Use when preparing to deploy an AI system, assessing algorithmic risk, auditing a model for bias, or producing a responsible AI impact assessment. Produces a structured ethics review covering fairness, transparency, privacy, safety, accountability, and societal impact with a risk tier score, pre-deployment checklist, and prioritised mitigations.★ 1.4k GitHub stars