Redline
Overview
Use this skill to review contract .docx files at paragraph level and generate:
- - a tracked-changes amended INLINECODE1
- a risk-report INLINECODE2
- 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.
- Run
scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py init-review for each source .docx. - Review the generated
.review.json paragraph by paragraph. - 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[]. - Run
materialize to create the amended .docx and risk report .docx. - 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:
CODEBLOCK0
Materialize the outputs:
CODEBLOCK1
Resources
- - JSON field details: INLINECODE17
- Main tool: INLINECODE18
技能名称: redline
详细描述:
Redline
概述
使用此技能按段落级别审阅合同 .docx 文件，并生成：
- - 一份带有修订标记的修改版 .docx
- 一份风险报告 .docx
- 一份 .review.json 审阅数据集
请勿将多个操作性段落合并为一个通用评论。每个非空段落或项目符号必须根据其自身内容进行审阅，并附有单独的风险分析，必要时提供替换措辞。
工作流程
- 1. 确认支持方及优先风险领域。
- 对每个源 .docx 文件运行 scripts/contractreviewpipeline.py init-review。
- 逐段审阅生成的 .review.json。
- 针对每个 clauses[] 条目，撰写仅与该段落相关的具体评估：
- favorability
- risk_level
- risk_summary
- why
itmatters
- proposed_replacement
- 5. 针对 opponent_comments[] 中的任何对方评论，起草具体回应。
- 运行 materialize 以生成修改版 .docx 和风险报告 .docx。
- 验证输出文件是否存在，且修订标记可读。
所需审阅标准
- - 将每个审阅单元视为一个段落级别的问题，而非整个章节的总结。
- 请勿在不同段落间重复使用相同的替换文本。
- 如果同一章节中的多个项目符号具有不同义务，请分别分析和重写。
- 保持替换措辞精确且可操作。必须与源段落中的具体风险匹配。
- 审阅隐私和安全条款时，检查以下内容：
- 无上限或超上限的责任敞口
- 审计权限过度
- 子处理方批准流程繁琐
- 跨境数据传输限制
- 安全事件通知时限
- 认证、渗透测试及客户测试权利
- 单方面政策更新
- 超出实际服务模式的AI/安全条款
命令
初始化审阅文件：
bash
python scripts/contractreviewpipeline.py init-review \
--input <合同.docx> \
--output <合同.review.json> \
--supported-party <方> \
--focus-area <领域-1> \
--focus-area <领域-2> \
--opponent-comment-author <作者-1>
生成输出文件：
bash
python scripts/contractreviewpipeline.py materialize \
--input <合同.docx> \
--review-json <合同.review.json> \
--amended-output <合同.修改版.docx> \
--report-output <合同.风险报告.docx> \
--author Codex Redline 审阅者
资源
- - JSON字段详情：references/review-json-schema.md
- 主要工具：scripts/contractreviewpipeline.py
