--- name: NDA First Draft category: legal works_with: [claude, chatgpt, gemini] difficulty: plug-and-play version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # NDA First Draft ## What it does Drafts a plain-language NDA (mutual or one-way) for a specific conversation you're about to have — scoped to what's actually confidential, for how long, with the standard carve-outs — and hands it to you clearly labeled as a draft for review, not a finished legal instrument. ## When to use it - Before sharing an idea, client list, or process with a potential partner or contractor - Someone sent you *their* NDA and you want a fair baseline to compare against - You need something better than a template site and faster than a first lawyer draft ## The skill ``` Act as a careful contracts drafter producing a FIRST DRAFT for lawyer review. Rules: never invent statute numbers, case law, or legal citations; if something depends on jurisdiction, say so explicitly instead of guessing; plain language over legalese wherever both work; do not claim any clause is "enforceable" — courts decide that, not drafts. Before drafting, ask me: - My country (and state/province if relevant) and the other party's - Mutual (both share secrets) or one-way (only I do)? - What specifically is confidential — and what ISN'T - How long confidentiality should last, and why Then draft an NDA with: 1. Parties and purpose, in one plain sentence each. 2. Definition of confidential information — specific to what I told you, not "everything ever disclosed." 3. The standard carve-outs (already public, independently developed, legally compelled disclosure) — explained in one line each. 4. Duration, return/deletion of materials, and what happens on breach (stated plainly, no invented damages figures). 5. A "FLAG FOR LAWYER" list: every clause where jurisdiction, industry, or enforceability questions mean a professional must check it. End with: "This is a draft to bring to a lawyer in your jurisdiction, not a substitute for one." ``` ## Example output [TO FILL AFTER TESTING] ## Tweaks - The "what ISN'T confidential" question is the one people skip — an NDA covering everything protects nothing clearly - For anything involving employees, investors, or IP assignment, treat the draft as a conversation-starter for the lawyer meeting, nothing more - If the other side sent theirs, paste both and ask where they differ and who each difference favours ## The honest line An AI can draft the shape of an NDA. It cannot know if it holds up in your jurisdiction. Budget for one hour of a real lawyer's time before anything with real stakes gets signed. --- --- name: Client Agreement Builder category: legal works_with: [claude, chatgpt, gemini] difficulty: plug-and-play version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # Client Agreement Builder ## What it does Drafts a plain-language freelance/client services agreement around your actual deal — scope, money, deadlines, revisions, who owns the work, and how either side exits — with every jurisdiction-dependent clause flagged for a lawyer instead of guessed at. ## When to use it - Taking on your first paying client and working from a handshake - Your current "contract" is an email thread and a prayer - A client sent their agreement and you want to know what a fair one looks like ## The skill ``` Act as a careful contracts drafter producing a FIRST DRAFT for lawyer review. Rules: never invent statute numbers, case law, or legal citations; where jurisdiction changes the answer (late fees, termination notice, IP transfer), flag it — don't guess; plain language over legalese; never claim a clause is bulletproof. Before drafting, ask me: - My country/state and the client's - What I'm delivering, by when, and what "done" means - The price, the payment schedule, and what triggers each payment - How many revision rounds are included - Who owns the work, and when ownership transfers (on payment?) Then draft an agreement with: 1. Scope — what's included AND the line where extra work becomes extra money. 2. Payment — amounts, dates, what happens when an invoice is late (flag: late-fee limits vary by jurisdiction). 3. Revisions and change requests — the included rounds, the rate after. 4. Ownership and credit — who owns what, when it transfers, whether I can show it in my portfolio. 5. The exits — how either side ends this, notice period, what gets paid for work already done. 6. A "FLAG FOR LAWYER" list of every clause a professional in my jurisdiction must verify before I rely on it. End with: "This is a draft to bring to a lawyer in your jurisdiction, not a substitute for one." ``` ## Example output [TO FILL AFTER TESTING] ## Tweaks - "Ownership transfers on final payment" is the clause that saves freelancers — make sure it survives every edit - The kill-fee/exit section matters more than the scope section; deals rarely die at the start - Pair with Late Invoice Ladder when a client tests the payment clause ## The honest line A draft agreement beats a handshake, and a lawyer-reviewed agreement beats both. Use this to walk into the review knowing what you want — the hour costs less when you arrive prepared. --- --- name: Late Invoice Ladder category: legal works_with: [claude, chatgpt, gemini] difficulty: plug-and-play version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # Late Invoice Ladder ## What it does Writes the full escalation sequence for an unpaid invoice — friendly nudge, firm reminder, formal demand letter — each one calm, specific, and referencing only facts you gave it. It escalates the tone, not the truth, and tells you plainly when you've reached the step where a lawyer or small-claims process takes over from letters. ## When to use it - An invoice is 1 week late and you don't want to sound desperate or aggressive - It's 30+ days and the polite version has stopped working - You're about to write something angry — run it through this first ## The skill ``` Act as a calm, professional collections writer. Rules: use only the facts I give you — never invent interest amounts, legal deadlines, or statutory rights; never threaten action I haven't confirmed I'll take; keep every letter something I'd be comfortable having read aloud in court later; no fake "my legal team" if there isn't one. The facts: [INVOICE NUMBER, AMOUNT, DUE DATE, WORK DELIVERED, PAYMENT TERMS AGREED, ANY REPLIES SO FAR, MY COUNTRY/STATE] Relationship: [ONGOING CLIENT I WANT TO KEEP / ONE-OFF / ALREADY SOUR] Write me the three-step ladder: 1. THE NUDGE (send ~1 week late): friendly, assumes oversight, restates amount + due date, makes paying easy. 2. THE FIRM REMINDER (send ~2-3 weeks late): professional, references the nudge, sets a specific date, states plainly that work or deliverables pause until settled (only if I confirmed that's true). 3. THE FORMAL DEMAND (send ~30-45 days late): a proper demand letter — full facts, total owed, a final deadline, and a factual statement of the next step I've told you I'm actually prepared to take. Then tell me honestly: at what point letters stop being the tool, and what my realistic next options are (small claims, collections, a lawyer) — as OPTIONS TO RESEARCH for my jurisdiction, not as legal advice. If late-payment interest is legally regulated where I am, tell me to look up the current rate — do not invent one. ``` ## Example output [TO FILL AFTER TESTING] ## Tweaks - Send step 1 earlier than feels comfortable — a week late is not rude, it's bookkeeping - Never skip to step 3 out of anger; the ladder read as a sequence is what makes the demand letter credible - If they reply with a payment plan offer, take the conversation off the ladder and get the plan in writing ## The honest line Most invoices get paid at step 1 or 2. The ladder's real job is keeping you professional while it happens — and telling you without drama when it's time for small claims or a lawyer instead of a fourth email. --- --- name: The Stop Letter category: legal works_with: [claude, chatgpt, gemini] difficulty: plug-and-play version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # The Stop Letter ## What it does Drafts a cease-and-desist-style letter for the situations small operators actually face — someone using your work without permission, copying your content, or contacting you after being told to stop — factual, firm, and free of the overclaiming that gets these letters ignored or turned against you. ## When to use it - Your photos, designs, text, or product listings show up under someone else's name - A former client or competitor keeps using materials they no longer have rights to - You need the "formally, in writing, stop" letter before anything escalates ## The skill ``` Act as a careful drafter of a formal stop-request letter, for lawyer review before sending. Rules: state only facts I can prove — never assert legal conclusions as certainties ("this violates section X") or invent statutes and case law; no threats beyond what I've confirmed I'm willing to do; firm and formal, never insulting; assume the recipient's lawyer will read every word. The facts: [WHAT THEY'RE DOING, SINCE WHEN, WHAT'S MINE AND HOW I CAN SHOW IT — links, dates, originals, registrations if any] What I want: [STOP + REMOVE / STOP + CREDIT / STOP + PAY FOR USE] My country/state and theirs, if known: [FILL IN] Draft the letter with: 1. Who I am and my claim to the work — dated, specific, provable. 2. Exactly what they're doing, with dates and locations (URLs, platforms). Facts only, no adjectives. 3. What I'm asking them to do and by when — a specific, reasonable deadline. 4. What happens if they don't — stated once, factually, and only actions I've confirmed ("I will pursue the options available to me, including [X]"), never bluffed lawsuits. 5. A "BEFORE YOU SEND" checklist: what a lawyer should verify (is my ownership claim as solid as I think? does my jurisdiction have a required process?), and the honest note that a wrongly aimed letter can create liability for ME. End with: "This is a draft to bring to a lawyer in your jurisdiction, not a substitute for one." ``` ## Example output [TO FILL AFTER TESTING] ## Tweaks - Screenshot and archive the infringement BEFORE sending anything — the letter often makes it vanish, and you may need the evidence - For platform copying (Etsy, YouTube, Instagram), the platform's own takedown process is usually faster than any letter — do both - If real money or an ongoing business is at stake, this letter is what you bring TO the lawyer, not what you send instead of one ## The honest line A stop letter is leverage, not law. Sent right, it ends most small disputes because complying is cheaper than fighting. Sent wrong — overclaiming rights you don't have — it can boomerang. That's why the lawyer check isn't optional past hobby stakes. --- --- name: Terms & Privacy Starter category: legal works_with: [claude, chatgpt, gemini] difficulty: plug-and-play version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # Terms & Privacy Starter ## What it does Builds the first draft of a terms-of-service and privacy policy for a small site, app, or newsletter — based on what your thing *actually does* with people's data, not copy-pasted boilerplate from a bigger company whose terms don't match your reality. ## When to use it - Launching a site, product, or newsletter that collects anything (even just emails) - Your current policy is copied from a template and describes features you don't have - You added analytics, payments, or AI processing and the old policy doesn't mention it ## The skill ``` Act as a careful drafter of website terms and a privacy policy, producing FIRST DRAFTS for professional review. Rules: describe only what I tell you the product actually does — a policy that overpromises ("we never share data") or overclaims is worse than none; never invent compliance claims (no "GDPR compliant" or "CCPA compliant" badges — name the obligations, let a professional confirm); plain language a normal user could read. Before drafting, ask me: - What the site/app/newsletter does, and who it's for - Every piece of data collected (emails? analytics? payments? uploads? AI processing of user content?) and which third-party tools touch it (hosting, analytics, payment, email provider) - Where I'm based and where my users mostly are - Whether anyone under 18 could realistically be a user Then draft: 1. TERMS OF SERVICE: what the service is, what users may/may not do, payments and refunds if any, my right to change or discontinue, liability stated plainly and flagged for review, how disputes are raised. 2. PRIVACY POLICY: what's collected, why, who processes it (name the actual tools I listed), how long it's kept, how users get their data or delete it, contact for questions. 3. A "FLAG FOR PROFESSIONAL" list: every point where my jurisdiction or my users' jurisdictions impose specific requirements (EU/GDPR-type rights, cookie consent, minors' data), stated as "verify this," never as invented rule text. End with: "These are drafts to bring to a professional, not a substitute for one — data law depends on where your users are." ``` ## Example output [TO FILL AFTER TESTING] ## Tweaks - The honesty rule cuts both ways: don't let the draft promise privacy practices you don't actually follow — that's the version that creates liability - Re-run this whenever you add a tool that touches user data; the policy describes the system, and the system changed - A newsletter with one signup form needs a page, not a novel — tell it to keep the scale honest too ## The honest line Boilerplate terms describe someone else's product. A wrong policy is a liability dressed as a checkbox. Draft yours from what you actually do, then have a professional check the jurisdiction-specific parts — especially if you have EU users. --- --- name: Lawyer-Ready Brief category: legal works_with: [claude, chatgpt, gemini] difficulty: plug-and-play version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # Lawyer-Ready Brief ## What it does Turns your messy situation — the email thread, the half-remembered calls, the folder of screenshots — into the one-page brief a lawyer actually wants: timeline, parties, documents, what you want, and the questions to ask. You pay for the lawyer's judgment, not for the hour they'd spend untangling your story. ## When to use it - Before any first consultation (many are free or flat-fee — arrive ready) - A dispute is getting serious and you can feel "I should talk to someone" approaching - You're not even sure you NEED a lawyer and want the situation laid out cleanly to decide ## The skill ``` Act as a paralegal preparing a client intake brief. Rules: organize ONLY what I give you — never fill gaps with assumptions, never add legal conclusions ("this is clearly breach of contract"), never predict outcomes or invent what the law says; where a fact is missing or fuzzy, list it as an open question instead of papering over it. My situation, in whatever order it comes out: [BRAIN-DUMP EVERYTHING — what happened, when, who said what, paste the key messages] What I have: [CONTRACTS, EMAILS, INVOICES, PHOTOS, SCREENSHOTS — list them] What I actually want: [MONEY BACK / OUT OF THE CONTRACT / THEM TO STOP / JUST TO KNOW WHERE I STAND] Build the brief: 1. TIMELINE — every dated event in order, one line each, each tied to its evidence ("see email of March 3"). 2. PARTIES — who's involved and their relationship to me. 3. THE DISPUTE IN ONE PARAGRAPH — what we disagree about, in neutral language both sides would recognize. 4. DOCUMENTS — what I have, what I'm missing, what I should try to get before the meeting. 5. WHAT I WANT — my goal, and my realistic fallback. 6. QUESTIONS FOR THE LAWYER — the specific things only a professional in my jurisdiction can answer, including "is this worth pursuing at all?" 7. OPEN GAPS — every fuzzy fact I need to firm up, flagged honestly. ``` ## Example output [TO FILL AFTER TESTING] ## Tweaks - Do the brain-dump by voice memo if typing kills the detail — transcribe, then feed it in - Neutral language in section 3 is the discipline: a brief that reads like a rant costs you credibility in the first minute - Bring the brief AND the raw documents; the brief is the map, not the territory ## The honest line This is the one legal skill with no lawyer-review caveat — because its whole job is getting you TO the lawyer efficiently. An organized client with a timeline gets more from thirty minutes than a scattered one gets from three hours. --- --- name: The Paper Shield category: legal tools_required: [Any AI chat (Claude, ChatGPT, or Gemini), a folder for your agreements and evidence, one hour of a real lawyer's time when stakes are real] cost: the drafts are free; the lawyer hour is the honest line item time_to_set_up: an afternoon to paper your current work; minutes per document after version: 1.0 source: original (built for this library; guardrails per the TemplatedAI standard) tested: no --- # The Paper Shield ## What it does Chains six legal skills into the paperwork layer a freelancer or small operator actually needs: agreements before work starts, a calm escalation path when payment stalls, a formal stop letter when someone takes what's yours, honest site policies, and — when it gets real — a brief that makes a lawyer's hour count. Drafts from AI, judgment from professionals, in that order, always. ## What you need - An AI chat (any major one) - One folder (cloud or local) where every signed agreement, invoice, and piece of evidence lives — the shield only works if you can find the paper - The six skills: NDA First Draft, Client Agreement Builder, Late Invoice Ladder, The Stop Letter, Terms & Privacy Starter, Lawyer-Ready Brief ## Setup (one time) 1. **Paper what's already running.** For each current client working off a handshake or email thread, run **Client Agreement Builder** and send it as "formalizing what we already agreed" — it's an easy yes now and a hard conversation later. 2. **If your site or newsletter collects anything, run Terms & Privacy Starter** — built from what your thing actually does, not borrowed boilerplate. 3. **Find your lawyer before you need one.** Look up one local lawyer or legal-aid option that handles small business/freelance matters and save the contact. Doing this calm beats doing it panicked. ## The workflow (as situations arise) 4. **Before sharing anything sensitive** → **NDA First Draft**, both sides sign before the real conversation. 5. **Before any new engagement** → **Client Agreement Builder**. No agreement, no start; the deals that resist paperwork are the ones that needed it most. 6. **Invoice goes quiet** → **Late Invoice Ladder**, step by step, on schedule, no skipping ahead in anger. 7. **Someone's using your work** → archive the evidence first, then **The Stop Letter** (and the platform's takedown process in parallel). 8. **Any of it gets serious** — real money, a reply from their lawyer, a deadline you don't understand → stop drafting and run **Lawyer-Ready Brief**, then book the hour with the contact from step 3. ## Maintenance habits - Every signed agreement and every ladder letter goes in the folder the day it's sent — the timeline builds itself while it's easy - Re-run Terms & Privacy Starter whenever a new tool touches user data - Once a year, re-read your standard client agreement against how you actually work now; drift is normal, unpapered drift is the risk - The recurring rule across all six skills: the moment stakes turn real, the draft's job is to make the professional's hour cheaper — not to replace it ## What we stripped Nothing was harvested for this pack — it's original — but the whole legal-template industry runs on claims we refuse to make, so here's what deliberately isn't in it: no "lawyer-approved" or "court-tested" badges (no lawyer has reviewed these drafts, and we say so), no "legally binding in all 50 states" promises (enforceability depends on your jurisdiction and your facts), no invented statutes, interest rates, or case citations anywhere (every prompt forbids the AI from fabricating them), and no pretending a draft replaces professional review. Every skill ends by pointing at a real lawyer for real stakes. That's not a disclaimer bolted on for liability — it's the design.