redline
Review and redline DOCX contracts paragraph by paragraph with tracked changes, clause-level risk analysis, and draft comment responses. Use when a user wants contract revisions that are specific to each paragraph or bullet, especially for privacy, security, data-processing, liability, AI, or other negotiated legal terms.
Install via CLI (Recommended)
clawhub install openclaw/skills/skills/chipmunkrpa/redline-contractRedline
Overview
Use this skill to review contract .docx files at paragraph level and generate:
- a tracked-changes amended
.docx - a risk-report
.docx - a
.review.jsonreview 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
- Confirm the supported party and the priority risk areas.
- Run
scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py init-reviewfor each source.docx. - Review the generated
.review.jsonparagraph by paragraph. - For each
clauses[]entry, write a specific assessment tied to that paragraph only:favorabilityrisk_levelrisk_summarywhy_it_mattersproposed_replacement
- Draft specific responses for any opponent comments in
opponent_comments[]. - Run
materializeto create the amended.docxand 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:
python scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py init-review \
--input <contract.docx> \
--output <contract.review.json> \
--supported-party "<party>" \
--focus-area "<area-1>" \
--focus-area "<area-2>" \
--opponent-comment-author "<author-1>"
Materialize the outputs:
python scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py materialize \
--input <contract.docx> \
--review-json <contract.review.json> \
--amended-output <contract.amended.docx> \
--report-output <contract.risk-report.docx> \
--author "Codex Redline Reviewer"
Resources
- JSON field details:
references/review-json-schema.md - Main tool:
scripts/contract_review_pipeline.py
Metadata
Not sure this is the right skill?
Describe what you want to build — we'll match you to the best skill from 16,000+ options.
Find the right skillPaste this into your clawhub.json to enable this plugin.
{
"plugins": {
"official-chipmunkrpa-redline-contract": {
"enabled": true,
"auto_update": true
}
}
}Related Skills
bank-recon
Perform bank reconciliation between bank statement and general ledger Excel files. Supports custom thresholds for amount matching and semantic description matching. Use when the user wants to reconcile financial records, find matching transactions, and generate a reconciliation report in Excel.
accounting-finance-system-research
Research and solve "how do I do this?" questions inside accounting and finance software systems (ERP, GL, AP/AR, billing, close, and reporting tools). Use when a user needs operational steps, setup guidance, or troubleshooting help in a specific system and wants the result documented as a quick memo or simple Q-and-A DOCX.
finresearchclaw
Finance, accounting, and investment research automation via the FinResearchClaw repo. Use when asked to run autonomous finance research workflows such as event studies, factor-model research, accounting regressions, forecast-error analysis, valuation research, or investment research pipelines. Prefer execution in this order: (1) Codex/ACP Codex when available, (2) Claude Code/ACP Claude, (3) direct API/config mode only as a fallback.
brd-reviewer
Review Business Requirements Documents in `.docx` format by reading the existing BRD, extracting paragraph-level context, drafting clarification questions for unclear statements, and producing a final Word document that combines comments and tracked changes. Use when the user wants a BRD reviewed, challenged for ambiguity, or redlined with proposed wording improvements while preserving Word-native review features.
relativity-deposition-question-builder
Develop deposition question sets from Relativity-exported PDF productions using a user-provided legal theory. Use when tasks involve reviewing opponent-produced PDFs, extracting per-page document IDs from the bottom-right corner (if two numbers appear, use the smaller one), mapping document relevance to a legal theory, and drafting questions grouped by document ID with required rationale and supporting quotes.