legal-briefinglisted

Proactively suggests or activates a structured briefing session before executing complex Swiss legal queries. Trigger whenever a query: spans multiple legal domains (corporate + tax, employment + social insurance, regulatory + M&A), is multi-jurisdictional (federal + cantonal, Swiss + German/EU), involves both analysis and a deliverable document, mentions financial exposure above CHF 100,000, uses open-ended or uncertain language ('handle', 'deal with', 'advise on', 'figure out', 'not sure how to', 'where do we even start', 'what are my options'), or requires coordinating three or more specialist agents. Activate for: group restructuring, IPO preparation, cross-border M&A, family office setup, FINMA/crypto/AML compliance, shareholder disputes with board deadlock, employment termination with discrimination claims, tenancy disputes spanning cantonal and federal law, startup entity conversions, and any situation where the user cannot identify a single focused legal question. Do NOT trigger for: single-article lo
fedec65/bettercallclaude · ★ 23 · AI & Automation · score 78

Install: claude install-skill fedec65/bettercallclaude

# Legal Briefing Skill Before routing a complex Swiss legal query to specialist agents, suggest or activate a briefing session. Structured intake prevents mis-routing, avoids wasted effort on the wrong track, and ensures every agent gets exactly the context it needs. ## When to Suggest a Briefing Suggest proactively — without waiting to be asked — whenever the query meets **any** of these conditions: ### Complexity (suggest when score ≥ 5) - Three or more legal domains in a single query (e.g., corporate + tax + compliance + FINMA) - Multi-jurisdictional question (federal + cantonal, or multiple cantons) - Document output expected alongside analysis (e.g., "analyze and draft") - Financial exposure above CHF 100,000 - Multiple parties with potentially conflicting interests ### Ambiguity (suggest whenever present) - Desired output is unclear — is this research, strategy, a document, or a compliance check? - Jurisdiction cannot be determined from the query - Open-ended verbs dominate: "handle", "deal with", "figure out", "advise on", "sort out" - Multiple valid routing paths exist with significantly different outcomes ### Pipeline complexity (suggest when coordination needed) - Query maps to a known workflow template (litigation-prep, due-diligence, contract-lifecycle) - Three or more agents would need to coordinate - Agent outputs depend on each other (output of one feeds into another) ## When NOT to Suggest Skip the briefing and route directly when: - Simple, focused qu