lawyer-analyst

rysweet/amplihack · updated Apr 8, 2026

MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.

$npx skills add https://github.com/rysweet/amplihack --skill lawyer-analyst
0 commentsdiscussion
summary

Analyze events through the disciplinary lens of law, applying rigorous legal methodologies (statutory interpretation, case law analysis, legal reasoning), constitutional principles, procedural frameworks, substantive legal doctrines across multiple domains (contracts, torts, property, criminal, constitutional, administrative, international), and professional ethical standards to understand legal rights and obligations, assess liabilities and risks, identify applicable authorities, and recommend

skill.md

Lawyer Analyst Skill

Purpose

Analyze events through the disciplinary lens of law, applying rigorous legal methodologies (statutory interpretation, case law analysis, legal reasoning), constitutional principles, procedural frameworks, substantive legal doctrines across multiple domains (contracts, torts, property, criminal, constitutional, administrative, international), and professional ethical standards to understand legal rights and obligations, assess liabilities and risks, identify applicable authorities, and recommend legally sound strategies.

When to Use This Skill

  • Contract Analysis: Interpreting agreements, identifying obligations, assessing breach and remedies
  • Liability Assessment: Evaluating potential legal exposure in torts, criminal law, or regulatory violations
  • Compliance Review: Ensuring adherence to statutes, regulations, and industry standards
  • Dispute Analysis: Assessing strengths and weaknesses of legal positions in litigation or arbitration
  • Rights Analysis: Identifying constitutional, statutory, and common law rights
  • Statutory Interpretation: Understanding and applying legislation and regulations
  • Precedent Research: Finding and analyzing relevant case law
  • Risk Management: Identifying legal risks and mitigation strategies
  • Regulatory Analysis: Understanding administrative law, agency rules, and enforcement

Core Philosophy: Legal Thinking

Legal analysis rests on fundamental principles:

Rule of Law: Law, not arbitrary discretion, governs society. Everyone, including government, is subject to law. Predictability and stability are essential.

Precedent and Stare Decisis: Courts follow prior decisions (precedent) to ensure consistency and predictability. "Stand by things decided." Distinguishing cases or overruling precedent requires strong justification.

Textual Authority: Legal conclusions must be grounded in authoritative texts—statutes, constitutions, regulations, contracts, case law. Personal preferences are irrelevant.

Adversarial System: Truth emerges from competing advocates presenting strongest cases for each side. Lawyers have duty to zealously represent clients within bounds of law.

Burden of Proof: Party asserting claim bears burden of proving it. Standards vary: preponderance of evidence (civil), beyond reasonable doubt (criminal), clear and convincing evidence (some contexts).

Procedural Justice: How decisions are reached matters as much as outcomes. Due process, notice, opportunity to be heard, impartial tribunal are essential.

Statutory Interpretation Canons: Principles guide interpretation—plain meaning, legislative intent, avoiding absurd results, constitutional avoidance, rule of lenity (criminal statutes construed narrowly).

Legal Realism: Law is not purely logical or mechanical. Judges are humans influenced by facts, policy, and context. Understanding outcomes requires considering more than just rules.


Theoretical Foundations (Expandable)

Foundation 1: Sources of Law and Hierarchy

Constitutional Law: Supreme law of the land (U.S. context)

  • U.S. Constitution establishes government structure and fundamental rights
  • State constitutions govern state governments (cannot contradict federal constitution)
  • Constitutional provisions override conflicting statutes or regulations
  • Interpreted by courts, ultimately U.S. Supreme Court for federal constitution

Statutory Law: Legislation enacted by legislature

  • Federal statutes (Congress)
  • State statutes (state legislatures)
  • Local ordinances (municipalities)
  • Later statutes can override earlier statutes
  • Statutes override common law
  • Must comply with constitution

Regulatory Law (Administrative Law): Rules promulgated by administrative agencies

  • Agencies derive authority from statutes (delegation)
  • Regulations have force of law if properly promulgated
  • Examples: EPA regulations, SEC rules, FDA regulations
  • Subject to judicial review for compliance with statute and constitution

Common Law: Judge-made law from court decisions

  • Develops incrementally through case-by-case adjudication
  • Fills gaps where statutes don't address issues
  • Includes torts, contracts (supplemented by statutes), property
  • Can be overridden by statute
  • Binds lower courts in same jurisdiction (precedent)

Hierarchy (highest to lowest in U.S. federal system):

  1. U.S. Constitution
  2. Federal statutes and treaties
  3. Federal regulations
  4. State constitutions
  5. State statutes
  6. State regulations
  7. Common law

Supremacy Clause: Federal law supreme over state law when conflict exists (U.S. Constitution Article VI)

Sources:

Foundation 2: Common Law vs. Civil Law Systems

Common Law System (U.S., UK, former British colonies):

Characteristics:

  • Precedent-based: Prior judicial decisions bind future courts (stare decisis)
  • Adversarial: Parties present cases; judge/jury decides
  • Case law dominant: Judges create law through decisions
  • Incremental development: Law evolves gradually through cases

Advantages:

  • Flexibility: Adapts to new situations
  • Specificity: Detailed guidance from prior cases
  • Predictability: Similar cases decided similarly

Disadvantages:

  • Complexity: Voluminous case law
  • Inconsistency: Different courts may reach different results
  • Access: Requires legal expertise to navigate

Civil Law System (Continental Europe, Latin America, Japan):

Characteristics:

  • Code-based: Comprehensive legal codes (civil code, criminal code, etc.)
  • Inquisitorial: Judge actively investigates facts
  • Statutory law dominant: Codes are primary source
  • Less precedent: Prior decisions less binding

Advantages:

  • Accessibility: Codes are organized and (relatively) clear
  • Uniformity: Codes provide consistent rules
  • Democratic legitimacy: Codes enacted by legislature

Disadvantages:

  • Rigidity: Codes may not adapt quickly to new situations
  • Gaps: Codes cannot anticipate every situation
  • Abstraction: General principles may be unclear in application

Hybrid Systems: Many jurisdictions combine elements (e.g., Louisiana, Quebec, Scotland)

Application: Understanding legal system type is crucial for analyzing legal issues in different jurisdictions.

Sources:

Foundation 3: Constitutional Principles (U.S. Context)

Separation of Powers: Three branches with distinct functions

  • Legislative: Makes laws (Congress)
  • Executive: Enforces laws (President, agencies)
  • Judicial: Interprets laws (courts)
  • Checks and balances prevent concentration of power

Federalism: Power divided between federal and state governments

  • Enumerated powers (federal): Commerce, taxation, war, foreign affairs
  • Reserved powers (states): Police powers (health, safety, welfare, morals)
  • Concurrent powers: Both can exercise (e.g., taxation)

Individual Rights (Bill of Rights and amendments):

First Amendment: Speech, religion, press, assembly, petition

  • Free speech: Government generally cannot restrict content of speech (subject to narrow exceptions: incitement, true threats, obscenity, defamation)
  • Free exercise: Government cannot prohibit religious practice (unless neutral law of general applicability)
  • Establishment Clause: Government cannot establish religion

Fourth Amendment: Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures

  • Warrant requirement (with exceptions)
  • Exclusionary rule: Illegally obtained evidence inadmissible

Fifth Amendment: Due process, self-incrimination, takings, double jeopardy

  • Due process: Government cannot deprive life, liberty, or property without due process
  • Takings: Government must pay just compensation for taking private property

Fourteenth Amendment: Equal protection, due process (applies to states)

  • Equal protection: Government cannot discriminate without justification
  • Scrutiny levels: Strict (suspect classifications like race), intermediate (gender), rational basis (everything else)

Judicial Review: Power of courts to invalidate laws violating constitution

  • Established in Marbury v. Madison (1803)
  • Final arbiter: U.S. Supreme Court

Application: Constitutional law provides framework for assessing government action and individual rights.

Sources:

Foundation 4: Contract Law Principles

Definition: Contract is legally enforceable agreement

Formation (requirements for valid contract):

  1. Offer: Manifestation of willingness to enter bargain, inviting acceptance
  2. Acceptance: Unqualified agreement to terms of offer
  3. Consideration: Each party gives something of value (bargained-for exchange)
  4. Mutual assent: Meeting of minds (parties understand and agree)
  5. Capacity: Parties have legal capacity to contract (not minors, mentally incapacitated, intoxicated)
  6. Legality: Purpose must be legal

Defenses to Formation:

  • Fraud: Intentional misrepresentation inducing contract
  • Duress: Improper threat coercing agreement
  • Undue influence: Unfair persuasion taking advantage of relationship
  • Mistake: Erroneous belief about fact material to contract (mutual mistake may allow rescission)
  • Unconscionability: Contract so one-sided as to be oppressive

Performance and Breach:

  • Substantial performance: Materially performed obligations (minor deviations don't excuse other party)
  • Material breach: Serious failure to perform (excuses other party's performance, allows damages)
  • Anticipatory repudiation: Party indicates won't perform before performance due

Remedies:

  • Damages: Monetary compensation
    • Expectation damages: Put injured party in position if contract performed
    • Reliance damages: Reimburse expenses incurred in reliance
    • Restitution: Restore benefit conferred to prevent unjust enrichment
  • Specific performance: Court orders breaching party to perform (rare, typically for unique goods like land)
  • Rescission: Undo contract, restore parties to pre-contract position

Parol Evidence Rule: Extrinsic evidence (oral statements, prior drafts) generally inadmissible to contradict written contract if contract is fully integrated

Statute of Frauds: Certain contracts must be in writing (e.g., land sales, contracts taking >1 year)

Application: Contract law governs most commercial relationships and many personal interactions.

Sources:

Foundation 5: Tort Law Principles

Definition: Tort is civil wrong causing injury for which law provides remedy (typically damages)

Categories:

Intentional Torts: Defendant intends act and consequences

Battery: Intentional harmful or offensive contact

  • Elements: Intent, contact, harmful/offensive

Assault: Intentional act placing plaintiff in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful/offensive contact

False Imprisonment: Intentional confinement within bounded area

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: Extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causing severe emotional distress

Trespass: Intentional physical invasion of another's property

Conversion: Intentional substantial interference with plaintiff's property

Negligence: Unintentional harm resulting from failure to exercise reasonable care

Elements (all required):

  1. Duty: Legal obligation to conform to standard of care
    • General duty: Reasonable person under circumstances
    • Special relationships may create heightened duties
  2. Breach: Failure to conform to required standard
    • What would reasonable person have done?
  3. Causation: Breach caused harm
    • Actual cause (cause-in-fact): "But for" defendant's breach, injury wouldn't have occurred
    • Proximate cause: Injury was foreseeable consequence of breach
  4. Damages: Actual injury or loss

Defenses:

  • Contributory negligence: Plaintiff's own negligence contributed (complete bar in some jurisdictions)
  • Comparative negligence: Damages reduced by plaintiff's percentage of fault (modern approach)
  • Assumption of risk: Plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily encountered known risk

Strict Liability: Liability without fault for abnormally dangerous activities or defective products

  • No need to prove negligence
  • Defendant liable even if exercised reasonable care
  • Examples: Explosives, wild animals, defective products

Products Liability:

  • Manufacturer/seller liable for defective products causing injury
  • Design defect: Product design is unreasonably dangerous
  • Manufacturing defect: Product deviates from design
  • Warning defect: Inadequate warnings or instructions

Damages:

  • Compensatory: Actual losses (medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering)
  • Punitive: Punishment and deterrence (intentional or reckless conduct)

Application: Tort law provides compensation for injuries and deters harmful conduct.

Sources:


Core Analytical Frameworks (Expandable)

Framework 1: IRAC Method (Legal Analysis Structure)

Purpose: Systematic framework for legal analysis and writing

Components:

Issue: What legal question must be resolved?

  • Frame as specific question
  • Example: "Did the defendant breach the contract by delivering goods one week late?"

Rule: What legal rule governs?

  • Identify applicable statute, regulation, or common law rule
  • State elements or test
  • Cite authority (case, statute, regulation)
  • Example: "A material breach occurs when a party fails to perform a substantial part of the contract. Smith v. Jones, 123 F.3d 456 (9th Cir. 2020)."

Application (Analysis): Apply rule to facts

  • Match facts to rule elements
  • Analogize to or distinguish from precedent cases
  • Consider counterarguments
  • Example: "Here, the contract specified delivery by June 1. Defendant delivered June 8, one week late. However, plaintiff was able to use the goods and suffered no damages. In Smith, the court held that a one-week delay without damages was not material. Similarly here..."

Conclusion: Answer the issue question

  • Based on analysis, what is result?
  • Example: "Therefore, the delay likely does not constitute a material breach."

Variations:

  • CREAC: Conclusion, Rule, Explanation, Application, Conclusion (leads with conclusion)
  • TRAC: Thesis, Rule, Application, Conclusion (similar to CREAC)

Application: IRAC provides structure for legal memos, briefs, and exam answers.

Sources:

Framework 2: Statutory Interpretation Canons

Purpose: Principles guiding interpretation of statutes

Textual Canons:

Plain Meaning Rule: Words given ordinary meaning unless technical term or defined

  • Start with text
  • If clear, apply it
  • Don't go beyond text unless ambiguous

Whole Act Rule: Interpret provisions in context of entire statute

  • Provisions should be read together harmoniously
  • Avoid interpretations creating internal conflicts

Specific Governs General (Generalia specialibus non derogant): Specific provision controls over general provision

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius: Expression of one thing excludes others

  • If statute lists specific items, unlisted items excluded
  • Example: Statute says "dogs, cats, and birds" → Probably doesn't include hamsters

Ejusdem Generis: General term following specific terms interpreted to include only things of same kind

  • "Cars, trucks, and other vehicles" → "Other vehicles" likely means motor vehicles, not bicycles or airplanes

Intent-Based Canons:

Legislative Intent: Seek to effectuate legislature's purpose

  • Review legislative history (committee reports, floor debates)
  • Consider problem statute was meant to address

Avoid Absurd Results: Reject interpretations leading to absurd or unreasonable results

Constitutional Avoidance: If statute can be interpreted in two ways, choose interpretation avoiding constitutional questions

Rule of Lenity: Criminal statutes construed narrowly in favor of defendant when ambiguous

  • Due process and fair notice require clarity

Chevron Deference: Courts defer to agency's reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statute it administers (Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, 1984)

  • Step 1: Is statute clear? If yes, apply clear meaning.
  • Step 2: If ambiguous, is agency's interpretation reasonable? If yes, defer.
  • Note: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) overruled Chevron, requiring courts to exercise independent judgment

Policy Canons:

Remedial Statutes Broadly Construed: Statutes providing remedies (workers' comp, civil rights) interpreted liberally

In Pari Materia: Statutes on same subject construed together

Application: Canons guide interpretation when statutory text is ambiguous or unclear.

Sources:

Framework 3: Case Law Analysis and Precedent

Purpose: Understand and apply prior judicial decisions

Components of Case Analysis:

Facts: What happened?

  • Parties
  • Events leading to dispute
  • Procedural history (trial court ruling, appeals)

Issue: What legal question did court address?

  • Framed as specific question

Holding: What did court decide?

  • Court's answer to issue
  • Narrow holding: Specific to facts
  • Broad holding: General principle

Reasoning: Why did court decide this way?

  • Legal rules applied
  • Policy considerations
  • Analogies to other cases
  • Distinctions from other cases

Dicta: Statements not necessary to decision

  • Not binding precedent
  • May be persuasive

how to use lawyer-analyst

How to use lawyer-analyst on Cursor

AI-first code editor with Composer

1

Prerequisites

Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:

  • Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
  • Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with node --version)
  • Active project directory or workspace where you want to add lawyer-analyst
2

Execute installation command

Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:

$npx skills add https://github.com/rysweet/amplihack --skill lawyer-analyst

The skills CLI fetches lawyer-analyst from GitHub repository rysweet/amplihack and configures it for Cursor.

3

Select Cursor when prompted

The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:

◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────
│ • Amp
│ • Antigravity
│ • Cline
│ • Codex
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ • Cursor
│ • Windsurf
4

Verify installation

Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:

.cursor/skills/lawyer-analyst

Reload or restart Cursor to activate lawyer-analyst. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /lawyer-analyst) or your agent's skill management interface.

Security & Verification Notice

We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.

Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.

List & Monetize Your Skill

Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning

GET_STARTED →

Use Cases

User Story & Requirements Generation

Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs

Example

Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios

Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage

Competitive Analysis

Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps

Example

Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities

Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days

Roadmap Prioritization

Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs

Example

Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale

Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster

Stakeholder Communication

Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations

Example

Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement

Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead

Implementation Guide

Prerequisites

  • Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
  • Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
  • Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
  • Stakeholder contact information and communication channels

Time Estimate

30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements

Installation Steps

  1. 1.Install product management skill
  2. 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
  3. 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
  4. 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
  5. 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
  6. 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
  7. 7.Share effective prompts with product team

Common Pitfalls

  • Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
  • Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
  • Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
  • Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
  • Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements

Best Practices

✓ Do

  • +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
  • +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
  • +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
  • +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
  • +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
  • +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition

✗ Don't

  • Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
  • Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
  • Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
  • Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
  • Don't ignore company-specific context and culture

💡 Pro Tips

  • Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
  • Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
  • Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
  • Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs

When to Use This

✓ Use When

Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.

✗ Avoid When

Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.

Learning Path

  1. 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
  2. 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
  3. 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
  4. 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation

Discussion

Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
  • No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviews

Ratings

4.746 reviews
  • Ganesh Mohane· Dec 16, 2024

    Keeps context tight: lawyer-analyst is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Dev Park· Dec 16, 2024

    We added lawyer-analyst from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.

  • Benjamin Kim· Dec 12, 2024

    I recommend lawyer-analyst for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

  • Xiao Robinson· Dec 12, 2024

    Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: lawyer-analyst is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.

  • Aarav Lopez· Dec 4, 2024

    lawyer-analyst has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Mia Anderson· Nov 23, 2024

    Keeps context tight: lawyer-analyst is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Sakshi Patil· Nov 7, 2024

    lawyer-analyst has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Isabella Martinez· Nov 7, 2024

    lawyer-analyst reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Chaitanya Patil· Oct 26, 2024

    Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: lawyer-analyst is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.

  • Aarav Reddy· Oct 26, 2024

    Registry listing for lawyer-analyst matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.

showing 1-10 of 46

1 / 5