New: 98,000+ skills indexed from GitHub repos with 100+ stars · every skill safety-checkedBrowse top skillsTop skills
Esc to closeBrowse all skills
Submit a skillBrowse skills
Submit a skillBrowse skills

Agent skill

Contract QA

by LegalQuants in LegalQuants/lq-ai

A skill your agent uses when the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means, where something is addressed, whether a term is unusual, how a provision…

Apache-2.0Auto-check passedLegal & Compliance

Install Contract QA

skills CLI
$ npx skills add LegalQuants/lq-ai --skill contract-qa -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install LegalQuants/lq-ai contract-qa --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LegalQuants/lq-ai.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/contract-qa .claude/skills/contract-qa && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
contract-qa
GitHub stars
150
Token cost
~4k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,628 words
Files
8
Skills in repo
16
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
Apache-2.0

At a glance

A skill your agent uses when the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means, where something is addressed, whether a term is unusual, how a provision…

  • Works in 3 steps: Classify the question → Find the relevant content in the document → Produce the answer
  • The user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means
  • SKILL.md covers When this skill applies, Inputs, Workflow and Output formats by question type, plus 3 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Contract QA is an agent skill from LegalQuants/lq-ai. Use when the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means, where something is addressed, whether a term is unusual, how a provision compares to standard practice, or what would happen in a specified scenario under the contract. Produces an answer calibrated to the question's shape (direct answer for fact lookups, paragraph with context for "is this unusual" questions, structured findings for multi-issue questions), with verbatim citations to specific clauses. Does not…

Its SKILL.md is about 4k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 9 other files (for example `examples/example_type_a_lookup.md`, `examples/example_type_c_unusualness.md` and `examples/example_type_d_scenario.md`).

It sits in Legal & Compliance, covering Contract review. The repository describes itself as: Open-source AI for legal teams. Bring your own keys, run it where you want, own your data. The licence is Apache-2.0.

When your agent uses it

  • The user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means
  • Where something is addressed
  • Whether a term is unusual
  • How a provision compares to standard practice

Example prompts

  • “s shape (direct answer for fact lookups, paragraph with context for”
  • “/contract-qa”

Workflow steps

3 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Classify the question
  2. Find the relevant content in the document
  3. Produce the answer

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit d185a62. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are markdown).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Contract QA loads about 4k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 162 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,628 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~162
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~4k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from LegalQuants/lq-ai at commit d185a62, republished under its Apache-2.0 licence (© LegalQuants). 1,628 words, ~3,971 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/contract-qa/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 7 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
contract-qa
description
Use when the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means, where something is addressed, whether a term is unusual, how a provision compares to standard practice, or what would happen in a specified scenario under the contract. Produces an answer calibrated to the question's shape (direct answer for fact lookups, paragraph with context for "is this unusual" questions, structured findings for multi-issue questions), with verbatim citations to specific clauses. Does not perform full reviews — for that, use the appropriate review skill (NDA Review, DPA Checklist Review, MSA Review, etc.).
lq_ai.title
Contract QA
lq_ai.version
1.0.0
lq_ai.author
LegalQuants
lq_ai.tags
contracts, qa, question-answering, research
lq_ai.jurisdiction
agnostic
lq_ai.trigger_examples
what does this clause mean, where does the contract say anything about IP, is this indemnification provision unusual, what happens if we miss the renewal…
lq_ai.output_format
adaptive
lq_ai.self_improvement
false

Contract QA

Answer the user's specific question about a loaded contract. The answer is precise, cited to the document, and shaped by the question — not by a fixed template.

This skill handles question-driven inquiry against a single contract. It is the right skill when the user has a specific question and wants a specific answer. It is the wrong skill when the user wants a comprehensive review of a contract — for that, route to the appropriate review skill (NDA Review, DPA Checklist Review, MSA-SaaS Review, etc.).

When this skill applies

Apply when:

  • The user has loaded a contract and asks a specific question about its content.
  • The user asks "where" something is addressed in the contract.
  • The user asks whether a clause is unusual, standard, or aggressive.
  • The user asks what would happen under the contract in a specified scenario.
  • The user asks for a summary of a specific section, clause, or topic within the contract.

Do not apply when:

  • The user asks for a full review or risk assessment of the contract — route to the appropriate review skill.
  • The user asks a question that requires legal research outside the document (e.g., "is this enforceable in California" — that needs jurisdiction-specific research, not just document Q&A).
  • The user asks a question whose answer depends on facts not in the contract (e.g., "did we breach this" — that depends on facts the skill does not have).
  • The user asks for legal opinion (e.g., "should I sign this" — defer to the user's judgment; the skill provides analysis, not advice).
  • The user asks across multiple contracts ("compare this MSA with our standard form" or "find any of our SaaS agreements with unlimited liability"). This is multi-document Q&A; deferred to v2.

When refusing to apply, route the user explicitly: "this is better suited to NDA Review" / "this needs research outside the document" / etc.

Inputs

The skill requires the document and the question. If the user has a contract loaded but no specific question, ask:

"What would you like to know about this contract?"

Optional inputs (contract_type, perspective, jurisdiction, prior_context) calibrate the answer. The skill should:

  • Infer contract_type from the document if not provided, and state the inference in answers where it affects calibration ("Treating this as a SaaS MSA based on the structure...").
  • Use perspective when answering perspective-sensitive questions. "Is this unusual" reads differently from each side. If perspective is not provided and the question is perspective-sensitive, either ask for it or answer from a neutral lens with a note.
  • Reference jurisdiction only when the question depends on it. Most contract Q&A is jurisdiction-agnostic (what does the document say); jurisdiction matters for interpretation and enforceability questions.

Workflow

The workflow has three steps. Each step's behavior depends on the question type identified in step 1.

Step 1: Classify the question

Read the user's question and classify it into one of these types. The classification drives the output format (adaptive output is the whole reason this step matters).

Type A: Direct lookup. The user wants to know what the contract says about a specific topic.

  • "Where does the contract address indemnification?"
  • "What's the term of this agreement?"
  • "What does Section 7 say?"
  • "Does this contract have an arbitration clause?"
  • Output format: direct answer with verbatim quote and citation. Brief.

Type B: Interpretation. The user wants to understand what a clause means, how it operates, or how to apply it.

  • "What does this indemnification clause actually require?"
  • "How does the renewal mechanism work?"
  • "If we terminate, what survives?"
  • Output format: explanation paragraph with verbatim quote and citation. Plain language; preserve precision.

Type C: Comparison / unusualness. The user wants to know whether a provision is standard, unusual, aggressive, or favorable.

  • "Is this limitation of liability unusual?"
  • "How does this non-compete compare to standard?"
  • "Is the IP assignment scope aggressive?"
  • Output format: paragraph with context. Quote the provision; describe how it sits relative to typical practice for the contract type; calibrate to perspective if specified.

Type D: Scenario. The user wants to know what would happen in a specified factual scenario.

  • "What happens if we miss the renewal notice deadline?"
  • "If they breach, what are our remedies?"
  • "If we want to assign this contract, what do we have to do?"
  • Output format: scenario walk-through. Cite the controlling clauses; trace the consequence; note where the answer depends on facts the skill does not have.

Type E: Multi-issue. The user asks about multiple topics in one question, or asks about a topic that has multiple distinct aspects.

  • "What are the IP and confidentiality terms?"
  • "Walk me through the termination provisions."
  • "What protections do we have if they go bankrupt?"
  • Output format: structured findings. One subsection per issue, each with quote and citation.

Type F: Out of scope. The question is one the skill should not answer (full review, legal research, scenario depending on external facts, opinion).

  • Route to the appropriate path; do not answer.

If the question does not cleanly fit one type, default to the type that produces the most useful answer (typically B or E).

Step 2: Find the relevant content in the document

For every question type except F:

  • Locate the clauses, sections, or content in the document that answer the question.
  • For Type A and B, this is typically one or a few specific clauses.
  • For Type C, this includes the clause being asked about plus any related provisions (e.g., a limitation of liability question may need the LoL clause plus any carve-outs in the indemnification section).
  • For Type D, this includes the controlling clause plus any conditions, exceptions, and consequence provisions that the scenario triggers.
  • For Type E, this includes all clauses relevant to all issues asked about.

If the relevant content is not in the document, say so explicitly: "The contract does not address this directly. The closest provisions are [X], which suggests [interpretation], but the question is not resolved by the document."

If the relevant content is ambiguous, say so: "The contract is ambiguous on this point. Section X says [quote A], which would suggest [interpretation 1], but Section Y says [quote B], which would suggest [interpretation 2]. The contract does not resolve the conflict."

Show full SKILL.md (609 more words)Show less
Step 3: Produce the answer

Format the answer per the question type identified in Step 1.

For all formats: Lead with the answer. The user asked a question; the first sentence should answer it. Citations support the answer; they do not bury it.

Verbatim quotes must be exact. If you cannot quote verbatim, paraphrase explicitly ("The clause says, in substance, ..."). Do not produce reconstructed quotes that look verbatim but aren't.

Citations include the section/clause reference and (where the document supports it) the page reference. Format: [§4.2(b)] or [§4.2(b), p. 7].

Length is proportional to question shape. A Type A question gets a sentence. A Type C question gets a paragraph. A Type E question gets one subsection per issue. Do not pad.

Always identify what you cannot answer. If part of the question is out of scope, or depends on facts not in the document, name that explicitly at the end: "The skill cannot determine [X] from the document alone — that depends on [the user's facts / jurisdiction-specific law / counterparty's behavior]."

Output formats by question type

Type A — Direct lookup format
markdown
[Direct answer in one sentence.]

> [Verbatim quote from the contract]

[§ ref, p. ref]

[If relevant: brief note on context, e.g., "This is in the boilerplate section; no special carve-outs apply."]
Type B — Interpretation format
markdown
[Direct answer / interpretation in one or two sentences.]

The relevant clause is [§ ref]:

> [Verbatim quote]

[Two to four sentences explaining how the clause operates: what triggers it, what it requires, what its scope is, what its limits are. Use plain language; preserve legal precision where it matters.]

[If applicable: cross-references to related clauses that affect the interpretation.]
Type C — Comparison / unusualness format
markdown
[Direct verdict in one sentence: standard / unusual / aggressive / favorable to [perspective].]

The clause says [§ ref]:

> [Verbatim quote]

[One to two sentences describing how this provision sits relative to typical practice for [contract_type]. What's the typical range? Where does this fall in that range? What's the practical effect of the deviation, if any?]

[If perspective was specified: how this reads from the user's side specifically.]

[If unusual / aggressive: what a more standard version would look like.]
Type D — Scenario format
markdown
[Direct answer in one sentence: under the contract, [the scenario produces this outcome].]

The controlling provisions are:

- **[§ ref]** — [brief description of what this clause does in the scenario]

  > [Verbatim quote of the relevant language]

[If multiple clauses operate together, include each. Trace the chain of consequence: clause X triggers, which produces consequence Y, which interacts with clause Z, etc.]

[Note any conditions, exceptions, or facts the answer depends on that are not in the document. Be specific: "This assumes [fact]; if [different fact], the answer changes to [different outcome]."]
Type E — Multi-issue format
markdown
[One- or two-sentence orientation: there are [N] distinct issues here; here's how they break down.]

### [Issue 1]

[Sub-answer for issue 1, formatted appropriately to its type — usually B or C.]

### [Issue 2]

[Sub-answer for issue 2.]

[etc.]

[If the issues interact: a brief closing paragraph identifying the interactions.]

Edge cases and refusals

  • Question is out of scope. Route the user to the appropriate skill: NDA Review, MSA Review, DPA Checklist Review for full reviews; legal-research skill for jurisdiction-specific questions; etc. Do not attempt to answer.

  • Question is unanswerable from the document alone. Say so. Identify what would be needed to answer (specific facts, jurisdictional analysis, counterparty's interpretation) and stop. Do not speculate.

  • Question is ambiguous. Ask one clarifying question rather than guessing: "Are you asking about [interpretation 1] or [interpretation 2]? They produce different answers."

  • Question requires reading the contract to answer but the document is missing pages, has OCR errors, or is otherwise incomplete. Note the document quality issue: "The document I have appears to be incomplete — [§ X] references [§ Y] which is not in the file. Answer based on what's present, with that caveat."

  • User asks for legal advice ("should I sign this"). Reframe: "That's a judgment call I won't make for you. What I can tell you about the contract is [factual analysis]. Whether that's acceptable depends on your business judgment about [the trade-off involved]."

  • User asks "is this clause enforceable in [jurisdiction]" Partial answer: describe what the clause says, note that enforceability depends on jurisdiction-specific law, and route to legal research: "The clause says [X]. Whether that's enforceable in [jurisdiction] depends on [the relevant law]; I can analyze the document but not the law. Recommend a research query."

  • User asks a perspective-sensitive question ("is this favorable") but no perspective was specified. Ask: "Favorable to whom — your side, the counterparty, or neutral?"

  • User has been asking many questions about the same document and shows signs of wanting a full review. Suggest the route: "Based on the questions so far, you may want a full review using NDA Review / MSA Review / etc. — that produces a structured report rather than answering question-by-question."

What this skill does not do

  • Full contract review (route to the appropriate review skill).
  • Multi-document Q&A (deferred to v2; tracked as DE-060).
  • Legal research outside the document (route to research skill).
  • Enforceability opinions (route to research; note as user judgment).
  • Drafting (route to drafting skill).
  • Strategy advice (out of scope; the user owns business judgment).

Reference materials

  • reference/question_classification.md — examples and edge cases for the six question types, with classification heuristics.
  • reference/citation_format.md — conventions for citing within Contract QA outputs.
  • examples/example_type_a_lookup.md — worked example: direct lookup question.
  • examples/example_type_c_unusualness.md — worked example: comparison question with perspective.
  • examples/example_type_d_scenario.md — worked example: scenario walkthrough with conditional outcomes.
  • examples/example_type_e_multi_issue.md — worked example: multi-issue question producing structured findings.

© LegalQuants, Apache-2.0. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 7 other files in skills/contract-qa of LegalQuants/lq-ai.

  • SKILL.md
  • examples/example_type_a_lookup.md
  • examples/example_type_c_unusualness.md
  • examples/example_type_d_scenario.md
  • examples/example_type_e_multi_issue.md
  • reference/citation_format.md
  • reference/question_classification.md
  • test-plan.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit d185a62

Compare with similar skills

Contract QA next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Contract QA compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Contract QA this skillLegalQuants/lq-ai150—~4kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Contract Reviewevolsb/claude-legal-skill4641 repos~3.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Commercial Legal Plapiotrowski-afk/commercial-legal-pl1761 repos~4.1kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Hand Drawnthreerocks/hand-drawn-styles2.2k—~398Automated safety check: PassMIT
Tabular Document Reviewanthropics/claude-for-legal9.6k3 repos~4.3kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Tw Formal WritingImbad0202/tw-formal-writing179—~1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Contract Review

    evolsb/claude-legal-skill

    Review legal contracts, NDAs, employment agreements, SaaS terms, and M&A documents.

    464 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~3.6k tokens
    Legal & ComplianceAuto-check passed

  • Commercial Legal Pl

    apiotrowski-afk/commercial-legal-pl

    Skill do analizy i tworzenia umów według polskiego prawa, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem umów B2B, IP i IT (body leasing, NDA, wdrożenia, SaaS, przeniesienie praw autorskich, ugody).

    176 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~4.1k tokens
    Legal & ComplianceAuto-check passed

  • Hand Drawn

    threerocks/hand-drawn-styles

    A skill your agent uses when users ask for a hand-drawn or illustrated image prompt, name one of the repository's 20 numbered styles or the 3.1 stable variant, or mention triggers such as…

    2.2k GitHub stars~398 tokensUpdated 2 days ago
    Legal & ComplianceAuto-check passed

  • Tabular Document Review

    anthropics/claude-for-legal

    Official

    Builds a review grid with one row per document and one column per data point, each cell cited to a verbatim quote, built for M&A diligence and other batch reviews.

    9.6k GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~4.3k tokens
    Legal & ComplianceAuto-check passed

  • Tw Formal Writing

    Imbad0202/tw-formal-writing

    台灣正式文件撰寫助手 — 涵蓋政府公文、政府機關其他文件、法律文件、人民對政府文書四類中文正式文件的撰寫（不含學術論文、商業文書、私人書信等，見下方排除清單）。

    179 GitHub stars~1k tokensUpdated 16 days ago
    Legal & ComplianceAuto-check passed

  • Contract Review Pro

    CSlawyer1985/contract-review-pro

    专业合同审核 Skill：7步工作流（含立场声明、框架审阅、类型路由）、5类通用门禁+16个专项门禁、终稿三件套+HTML可视化报告、8维度风险评分、修订5分类路由。完全自包含，零外部依赖。

    277 GitHub stars~2.3k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Legal & ComplianceAuto-check passed

More from LegalQuants/lq-ai

All 16 skills in this repo

  • Action Items From Client Alert

    LegalQuants/lq-ai

    A skill your agent uses when the user provides a client alert, regulatory bulletin, law firm memo, or similar legal update and wants the time-sensitive action items, deadlines, and obligations…

    150 GitHub stars~4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

  • Case Law Research

    LegalQuants/lq-ai

    A skill your agent uses when the user asks to find, read, or cite U.S.

    150 GitHub stars~2.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

  • Comms Improver

    LegalQuants/lq-ai

    A skill your agent uses when the user has a piece of legal-jargon-heavy text and wants it rewritten in plain language for a specified non-legal audience.

    150 GitHub stars~3.8k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

  • Contract Snapshot

    LegalQuants/lq-ai

    A skill your agent uses when the user wants to compare the same handful of terms across N contracts side-by-side in a grid — what is the term, survival period, carveouts, and governing law in each…

    150 GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

  • Dpa Checklist Review

    LegalQuants/lq-ai

    A skill your agent uses when the user provides a Data Processing Agreement, Data Processing Addendum, or HIPAA Business Associate Agreement and asks whether it contains the terms required under the…

    150 GitHub stars~3.7k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

  • Enhance Prompt

    LegalQuants/lq-ai

    A skill your agent uses when the user has typed a short or vague prompt and the system is configured to expand prompts before submission, or when the user explicitly invokes "Enhance Prompt" or asks…

    150 GitHub stars~3.3k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Contract QA

What does Contract QA do?

A skill your agent uses when the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means, where something is addressed, whether a term is unusual, how a provision…. Contract QA is an agent skill from LegalQuants/lq-ai. Use when the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means, where something is addressed, whether a term is unusual, how a provision compares to standard practice, or what would happen in a specified scenario under the contract.

When should I use Contract QA?

Contract QA fits situations like: the user has a contract loaded and asks a specific question about it — what a clause means; where something is addressed; whether a term is unusual; how a provision compares to standard practice.

How do I install Contract QA in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add LegalQuants/lq-ai --skill contract-qa -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/contract-qa in LegalQuants/lq-ai) into .claude/skills/contract-qa in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Contract QA in Codex?

Run `npx skills add LegalQuants/lq-ai --skill contract-qa -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/contract-qa in LegalQuants/lq-ai) into .agents/skills/contract-qa in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Contract QA in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add LegalQuants/lq-ai --skill contract-qa -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/contract-qa, .gemini/skills/contract-qa, .github/skills/contract-qa and .opencode/skills/contract-qa in your project.

What does Contract QA need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Contract QA is instructions for the agent only.

Does Contract QA access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Contract QA safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Contract QA use?

Contract QA is published under the Apache-2.0 licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Contract QA use?

About 4k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 16k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Contract QA?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Contract QA: Contract Review (evolsb/claude-legal-skill, 464 stars), Commercial Legal Pl (apiotrowski-afk/commercial-legal-pl, 176 stars), Hand Drawn (threerocks/hand-drawn-styles, 2.2k stars) and Tabular Document Review (anthropics/claude-for-legal, 9.6k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Contract QA?

LegalQuants (a GitHub organization) maintains it in LegalQuants/lq-ai, which has 150 GitHub stars. The repository holds 16 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 11, 2026.

Source: LegalQuants/lq-ai on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.