Back to Details

contract-drafting-and-review-guidance-china-law

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Overview

概述

This skill applies the Chinese contract drafting and review method known as "三观四步法" from 合同起草审查指南 (T/CAB 0121-2021). It helps lawyers, in-house counsel, business operators, and legal students structure contract review, draft contract frameworks, identify risks, and produce review comments under a China-law lens.
This skill is a workflow and checklist tool. It does not replace current legal research or advice from a licensed lawyer.
本Skill采用《合同起草审查指南》（T/CAB 0121-2021）中提出的「三观四步法」这一中国合同起草审查方法，帮助律师、法务、企业经营者及法学生在中国法律视角下结构化开展合同审查、搭建合同框架、识别风险并出具审查意见。
本Skill是一款工作流与清单工具，不替代现行法律检索或执业律师提供的法律意见。

When to Use This Skill

何时使用本Skill

  • The user asks to review a contract, draft a contract, or identify contract risks.
  • The user asks how to structure a transaction before drafting documents.
  • The user asks whether a contract form, clause order, or clause wording is appropriate.
  • The user asks for a checklist for contract parties, subject matter, procedures, performance, breach, dispute resolution, or signing requirements.
  • The contract is governed by PRC law or the user asks for China-law contract drafting logic.
  • 用户要求审查合同、起草合同或识别合同风险。
  • 用户在起草文件前询问如何搭建交易结构。
  • 用户询问合同形式、条款顺序或条款表述是否恰当。
  • 用户需要合同主体、标的、程序、履行、违约、争议解决或签署要求相关的检查清单。
  • 合同适用中国法律，或用户需要中国法律下的合同起草逻辑。

HOW TO USE THIS SKILL

如何使用本Skill

  1. Identify the user's task: contract review, contract drafting, deal-structure design, clause rewrite, or checklist generation.
  2. Ask only for missing facts that are necessary: contract type, user role, transaction purpose, counterparty identity, subject matter, price/payment, timeline, and special risk tolerance.
  3. Apply the four-step process: communicate needs -> analyze through three perspectives -> review -> submit.
  4. Analyze in this order: macro transaction structure -> meso contract structure -> micro clause wording.
  5. If legal validity depends on current statutes, regulatory approvals, judicial interpretations, or local rules, tell the user to verify current law or consult qualified counsel.
  1. 明确用户的任务类型：合同审查、合同起草、交易结构设计、条款改写或清单生成。
  2. 仅询问必要的缺失信息：合同类型、用户角色、交易目的、交易对手身份、标的、价格/付款方式、时间线及特殊风险承受能力。
  3. 采用四步流程：需求沟通 → 三观分析 → 审查 → 输出。
  4. 按以下顺序分析：宏观交易结构 → 中观合同结构 → 微观条款表述。
  5. 如果法律效力取决于现行法律、监管审批、司法解释或地方法规，需告知用户核实现行法律或咨询专业律师。

CITATION RULES

引用规则

Every substantive claim based on the guide's methodology must include a citation to the original text.
Quote files (load the relevant one):
  • contract-drafting-quotes.md
    : definitions of macro, meso, micro analysis; drafting principles; transaction structure; parties; three-points-one-line method.
  • contract-review-quotes.md
    : the complete 三观四步法 statement, review principles, transaction-structure framing, and comprehensive review.
Citation format - always use this exact structure:
"Source text here."
Anchor mapping:
  • contract-drafting-quotes.md
    : 
    #transaction-structure-importance
    , 
    #meso-contract-structure
    , 
    #micro-clause-expression
    , 
    #four-steps-process
    , 
    #promote-transaction-principle
    , 
    #risk-control-balance
    , 
    #legal-business-combination
    , 
    #contract-types
    , 
    #parties-identification
    , 
    #three-points-one-line-method
    , 
    #review-checklist
    , 
    #standard-final-goal
  • contract-review-quotes.md
    : 
    #three-perspectives-four-steps
    , 
    #promote-transaction
    , 
    #macro-transaction-structure
    , 
    #three-points-one-line
    , 
    #standard-purpose
    , 
    #comprehensive-review
Rules:
  • Cite the guide when explaining 三观四步法, macro/meso/micro analysis, promote-transaction principle, or the three-points-one-line method.
  • Keep source passages brief. Use the quote files for exact text and paraphrase the workflow in the response.
  • If the user asks for binding legal advice, state that the skill provides review structure and drafting issues, not a formal legal opinion.
所有基于该指南方法论的实质性主张，都必须引用原文。
引用文件（加载相关文件）：
  • contract-drafting-quotes.md
    ：宏观、中观、微观分析的定义；起草原则；交易结构；主体；三点一线法。
  • contract-review-quotes.md
    ：三观四步法完整说明、审查原则、交易结构框架及综合审查。
引用格式——必须严格遵循以下结构：
"此处为原文内容。"
锚点映射：
  • contract-drafting-quotes.md
    ：
    #transaction-structure-importance
    , 
    #meso-contract-structure
    , 
    #micro-clause-expression
    , 
    #four-steps-process
    , 
    #promote-transaction-principle
    , 
    #risk-control-balance
    , 
    #legal-business-combination
    , 
    #contract-types
    , 
    #parties-identification
    , 
    #three-points-one-line-method
    , 
    #review-checklist
    , 
    #standard-final-goal
  • contract-review-quotes.md
    ：
    #three-perspectives-four-steps
    , 
    #promote-transaction
    , 
    #macro-transaction-structure
    , 
    #three-points-one-line
    , 
    #standard-purpose
    , 
    #comprehensive-review
规则：
  • 解释三观四步法、宏观/中观/微观分析、促进交易原则或三点一线法时，需引用该指南。
  • 原文引用需简洁。使用引用文件中的准确文本，并在回复中对工作流进行意译。
  • 如果用户要求提供有约束力的法律意见，需说明本Skill仅提供审查框架和起草问题提示，不构成正式法律意见。

Core Principle

核心原则

Contract drafting and review should promote viable transactions while controlling legal and business risk. The agent must analyze the transaction at three levels: whether the deal structure works, whether the contract structure fits the deal, and whether the individual clauses are complete, clear, and enforceable.
合同起草与审查应在控制法律和商业风险的同时促进可行交易的达成。Agent必须从三个层面分析交易：交易结构是否可行、合同结构是否匹配交易、单个条款是否完整、清晰且可执行。

Workflow Inventory

工作流清单

WorkflowUser question patternInputsStepsOutputIndependent trigger?Distinct references?Triage scoreShould be subskill?Reason
Contract reviewPlease review this contractContract text, user role, concerns, governing lawNeeds -> macro -> meso -> micro -> review comments -> risk summaryStructured review memoYesSame guide3NoPrimary workflow; uses all dimensions in sequence.
Contract draftingDraft a contract framework for this dealDeal facts, parties, subject, price, timeline, risk allocationNeeds -> transaction structure -> form selection -> clause framework -> open questionsDrafting outline and clause checklistYesSame guide3NoShares the same analysis order as review, only output differs.
Deal-structure diagnosisCan this transaction be done this way?Transaction goal, parties, assets/services, approvals, constraintsMacro analysis -> legal/business obstacles -> alternativesStructure recommendationYesSame guide3NoA macro slice that remains tightly coupled to later drafting.
Clause rewriteIs this clause clear or risky?Clause text, role, commercial intentIdentify right/obligation/liability points -> rewrite -> residual riskRevised clause and rationaleYesSame guide3NoMicro slice but still uses the same three-points-one-line method.
Final review before signingWhat should I check before signing?Final draft, signing process, approvalsMacro/meso/micro spot check -> signing formalities -> submission notePre-signing checklistYesSame guide2NoReview-gate step inside the main workflow.
工作流用户问题模式输入步骤输出可独立触发？引用是否不同？分流评分是否应为子Skill？原因
合同审查请帮我审查这份合同合同文本、用户角色、关注点、适用法律需求 → 宏观 → 中观 → 微观 → 审查意见 → 风险总结结构化审查备忘录是同一指南3否核心工作流；按顺序使用所有维度。
合同起草为本次交易起草合同框架交易事实、主体、标的、价格、时间线、风险分配需求 → 交易结构 → 形式选择 → 条款框架 → 待确认问题起草大纲与条款清单是同一指南3否与审查的分析顺序相同，仅输出形式不同。
交易结构诊断这个交易可以这么做吗？交易目标、主体、资产/服务、审批要求、限制条件宏观分析 → 法律/商业障碍 → 替代方案结构建议是同一指南3否属于宏观分析模块，但与后续起草工作紧密耦合。
条款改写这个条款是否清晰或有风险？条款文本、角色、商业意图识别权利/义务/责任要点 → 改写 → 剩余风险修改后的条款及理由是同一指南3否属于微观分析模块，但仍采用相同的三点一线法。
签署前终审签署前我需要检查什么？最终草案、签署流程、审批文件宏观/中观/微观抽查 → 签署手续 → 提交说明签署前检查清单是同一指南2否主工作流内的审查关口步骤。

Architecture Justification

架构说明

Use a single-file skill because the guide is one integrated standard rather than a multi-domain book. All user tasks route through the same 三观四步法 sequence and differ mainly in output format. Separate subskills would duplicate the same macro, meso, micro, and review rules.
采用单文件Skill是因为该指南是一套完整的标准，而非跨领域的书籍。所有用户任务都遵循相同的三观四步法流程，差异主要在于输出格式。拆分单独的子Skill会导致相同的宏观、中观、微观及审查规则重复。

DIMENSION 1: Communicate Needs

维度1：需求沟通

The Rule: A contract cannot be reviewed or drafted properly until the transaction goal, user role, risk tolerance, and desired deliverable are clear.
规则： 在明确交易目标、用户角色、风险承受能力及预期交付物之前，无法妥善审查或起草合同。

Key questions to ask:

需询问的关键问题：

  • What type of contract or transaction is involved?
  • Who is the user in the transaction: buyer, seller, service provider, customer, licensor, licensee, investor, borrower, lender, landlord, tenant, or another role?
  • Is the task review, drafting, clause rewrite, risk spotting, or negotiation preparation?
  • What are the user's top concerns: payment, delivery, quality, termination, liability cap, IP, confidentiality, dispute forum, timing, or compliance?
  • Is a formal legal opinion, redline, email summary, or negotiation checklist needed?
  • 涉及的合同或交易类型是什么？
  • 用户在交易中的角色是什么：买方、卖方、服务提供商、客户、许可方、被许可方、投资方、借款方、出借方、出租方、承租方，还是其他角色？
  • 任务类型是审查、起草、条款改写、风险识别还是谈判准备？
  • 用户最关注的问题是什么：付款、交付、质量、终止、责任上限、知识产权、保密、争议解决机构、时间进度，还是合规？
  • 需要的交付物是正式法律意见、修订痕迹版、邮件摘要还是谈判清单？

Decision criteria / Checklist:

判定标准 / 检查清单：

  • Confirm the transaction objective and business background.
  • Confirm the contract type and governing law assumption.
  • Confirm user-side role and desired risk posture.
  • Identify missing documents: annexes, orders, specifications, authorization files, board resolutions, permits, or prior agreements.
  • If the facts are insufficient, ask targeted questions before giving detailed drafting language.
  • 确认交易目标和商业背景。
  • 确认合同类型和适用法律假设。
  • 确认用户方角色和预期风险偏好。
  • 识别缺失的文件：附件、订单、规格说明、授权文件、董事会决议、许可证或前期协议。
  • 如果事实不充分，先提出针对性问题，再提供详细的起草文本。

Warning signals:

警示信号：

  • The user provides only a clause but asks for a whole-contract conclusion.
  • The user's commercial goal conflicts with the contract form.
  • The user asks for maximum risk avoidance in a way that may block the transaction.
  • The user wants a final legal opinion without enough facts or current-law verification.
  • 用户仅提供单个条款，却要求得出全合同层面的结论。
  • 用户的商业目标与合同形式冲突。
  • 用户要求最大限度规避风险，而该方式可能阻碍交易达成。
  • 用户在事实不充分或未核实现行法律的情况下要求出具最终法律意见。

Agent instruction:

Agent指令：

Start every contract review or drafting task by listing the minimum assumptions and missing facts. Do not invent deal facts. If the user provides enough context, proceed directly and mark unresolved assumptions.
在启动每一项合同审查或起草任务时，先列出最低限度的假设和缺失的事实。不得虚构交易事实。如果用户提供了足够的上下文，可直接推进，并标注未解决的假设。

DIMENSION 2: Macro Transaction Structure

维度2：宏观交易结构

The Rule: First decide whether the transaction can be done and what structure should express the parties' main rights and obligations.
规则： 首先判断交易是否可行，以及应当采用何种结构来体现双方的主要权利义务。

Key questions to ask:

需询问的关键问题：

  • Is the chosen contract type consistent with the real transaction?
  • Are the parties legally capable, properly authorized, and commercially able to perform?
  • Is the subject matter legal, transferable, identifiable, and deliverable?
  • Are approvals, filings, registrations, bidding procedures, internal resolutions, or permits required?
  • Does the structure need guarantees, security, escrow, phased performance, conditions precedent, or alternative legal relationships?
  • 选择的合同类型与真实交易是否一致？
  • 交易主体是否具备法律行为能力、适当授权，以及商业上的履约能力？
  • 标的是否合法、可转让、可识别且可交付？
  • 是否需要审批、备案、登记、招投标程序、内部决议或许可证？
  • 交易结构是否需要保证、担保、资金托管、分阶段履行、先决条件或替代法律关系？

Decision criteria / Checklist:

判定标准 / 检查清单：

  • Contract type: named or unnamed contract, mixed contract, framework agreement, order model, lease/license/sale distinction.
  • Parties: legal status, authority, qualification, credit, performance capacity, affiliates, actual controller, guarantor, or missing necessary party.
  • Subject matter: ownership, defects, encumbrances, transfer restrictions, quality/specifications, IP ownership, service scope, compliance.
  • Procedure: approval, registration, filing, public bidding, internal decision, seal/signature authority, electronic signing validity.
  • Structure: direct or indirect transaction, single or multiple contracts, security arrangement, staged closing, condition precedent.
  • 合同类型：有名合同或无名合同、混合合同、框架协议、订单模式、租赁/许可/买卖的区分。
  • 主体：法律地位、权限、资质、信用、履约能力、关联方、实际控制人、保证人，或缺失必要主体。
  • 标的：所有权、瑕疵、权利负担、转让限制、质量/规格、知识产权归属、服务范围、合规性。
  • 程序：审批、登记、备案、公开招投标、内部决策、盖章/签字权限、电子签署效力。
  • 结构：直接或间接交易、单一或多份合同、担保安排、分阶段交割、先决条件。

Warning signals:

警示信号：

  • Counterparty identity differs from the actual performer or payee.
  • The subject matter is restricted, disputed, encumbered, or insufficiently described.
  • Required approvals or internal resolutions are absent.
  • The contract tries to hide an unlawful purpose through form.
  • A one-contract structure cannot capture the real transaction relationships.
  • 交易对手身份与实际履约方或收款方不一致。
  • 标的受限、存在争议、设有权利负担，或描述不充分。
  • 缺少必要的审批或内部决议。
  • 合同试图通过形式掩盖非法目的。
  • 单一合同结构无法涵盖真实的交易关系。

Agent instruction:

Agent指令：

For review, produce a macro conclusion: 
can proceed
, 
can proceed after adjustment
, 
high-risk
, or 
do not proceed without counsel review
. For drafting, propose a structure before drafting clauses. Cite 
contract-drafting-quotes.md#transaction-structure-importance
or 
contract-review-quotes.md#macro-transaction-structure
when explaining macro analysis.
审查场景下，需出具宏观结论：
可推进
、
调整后可推进
、
高风险
或
未经律师审查不得推进
。起草场景下，在起草条款前先提出结构方案。解释宏观分析时，需引用
contract-drafting-quotes.md#transaction-structure-importance
或
contract-review-quotes.md#macro-transaction-structure
。

DIMENSION 3: Meso Contract Structure

维度3：中观合同结构

The Rule: Select the contract form and clause order that fit the transaction stage, operational workflow, and legal effect the parties need.
规则： 选择符合交易阶段、运营工作流及双方所需法律效力的合同形式和条款顺序。

Key questions to ask:

需询问的关键问题：

  • Is this an intent letter, memorandum, reservation contract, framework contract, formal contract, order, settlement, supplement, or termination agreement?
  • Should the document be binding, partially binding, or non-binding?
  • Does a framework plus orders model fit repeated transactions?
  • Are attachments, specifications, statements of work, acceptance standards, or service levels integrated correctly?
  • Do clause order and definitions make the contract readable and internally consistent?
  • 这是意向书、备忘录、预约合同、框架合同、正式合同、订单、结算协议、补充协议还是终止协议？
  • 该文件应当是有约束力、部分有约束力还是无约束力的？
  • 框架加订单的模式是否适合重复性交易？
  • 附件、规格说明、工作说明书、验收标准或服务水平协议是否正确整合？
  • 条款顺序和定义是否能让合同具备可读性且内部一致？

Decision criteria / Checklist:

判定标准 / 检查清单：

  • Match document form to deal stage.
  • Define legal effect for intent letters or negotiation-stage documents.
  • For order models, define order issuance, acceptance, conflict rules, authority, and record retention.
  • For electronic contracts, verify signature reliability, notice method, and format-clause risk.
  • For group or affiliated-party contracts, define authorization and liability boundary.
  • For package contracts, align main contract, annexes, side letters, and dispute-resolution clauses.
  • 文件形式与交易阶段匹配。
  • 明确意向书或谈判阶段文件的法律效力。
  • 订单模式下，明确订单的发出、接受、冲突规则、权限及记录留存。
  • 电子合同场景下，核实签名可靠性、通知方式及格式条款风险。
  • 集团或关联方合同场景下，明确授权和责任边界。
  • 一揽子合同场景下，协调主合同、附件、补充协议及争议解决条款。

Warning signals:

警示信号：

  • A supposedly non-binding document contains binding obligations without saying so.
  • Orders can be placed by unauthorized personnel.
  • Annexes conflict with the main body.
  • A later document modifies an earlier document without conflict rules.
  • The contract structure is copied from a template that does not fit the transaction.
  • 本应无约束力的文件中包含有约束力的义务，却未明确说明。
  • 未经授权的人员可以下达订单。
  • 附件与主合同冲突。
  • 后续文件修改了先前文件，但未约定冲突规则。
  • 合同结构是从不匹配该交易的模板中复制而来的。

Agent instruction:

Agent指令：

When reviewing a contract's form, explain whether the document type matches the transaction and list structural fixes before line-level clause edits. Cite 
contract-drafting-quotes.md#meso-contract-structure
when explaining meso analysis.
审查合同形式时，需说明文件类型是否与交易匹配，并在进行逐行条款修改前列出结构层面的修正方案。解释中观分析时，需引用
contract-drafting-quotes.md#meso-contract-structure
。

DIMENSION 4: Micro Clause Expression and Three-Points-One-Line

维度4：微观条款表述与三点一线

The Rule: Clause review must connect prerequisites, rights and obligations, and liability consequences so the contract can be performed and enforced.
规则： 条款审查必须将前提条件、权利义务和责任后果关联起来，确保合同可履行、可执行。

Key questions to ask:

需询问的关键问题：

  • What must happen before each obligation arises?
  • Who has which right and who bears which obligation?
  • What happens if the obligation is late, defective, partial, impossible, or refused?
  • Are price, payment, delivery, acceptance, quality, IP, confidentiality, termination, breach, and dispute terms clear?
  • Are terms defined consistently and drafted in enforceable language?
  • 每项义务产生之前必须满足什么条件？
  • 谁享有哪些权利，谁承担哪些义务？
  • 如果义务履行迟延、有瑕疵、部分履行、履行不能或被拒绝，会有什么后果？
  • 价格、付款、交付、验收、质量、知识产权、保密、终止、违约及争议条款是否清晰？
  • 条款定义是否一致，且采用可执行的表述？

Decision criteria / Checklist:

判定标准 / 检查清单：

  • Contract header: title, parties, recitals, authority, definitions.
  • Core transaction clauses: subject, quantity/scope, quality, delivery or service process, acceptance, price, payment, invoice/tax, term, change process.
  • Risk allocation: warranties, representations, confidentiality, IP ownership, data/security, compliance, insurance, force majeure.
  • Exit and remedies: termination, rescission, cure period, liquidated damages, damages scope, liability cap, indemnity.
  • Boilerplate: notice, governing law, dispute resolution, assignment, severability, entire agreement, counterparts, effectiveness, signing/seal.
  • Expression quality: accurate, complete, unambiguous, non-contradictory, operationally executable.
  • 合同首部：标题、主体、鉴于条款、授权、定义。
  • 核心交易条款：标的、数量/范围、质量、交付或服务流程、验收、价格、付款、发票/税务、期限、变更流程。
  • 风险分配：保证、陈述、保密、知识产权归属、数据/安全、合规、保险、不可抗力。
  • 退出与救济：终止、解除、补救期、违约金、损害赔偿范围、责任上限、损失赔偿。
  • 通用条款：通知、适用法律、争议解决、转让、可分割性、完整协议、副本、生效、签署/盖章。
  • 表述质量：准确、完整、无歧义、无矛盾、可操作执行。

Warning signals:

警示信号：

  • Rights exist without matching obligations or remedies.
  • Liability clauses do not connect to specific breaches.
  • Acceptance standards are subjective or missing.
  • Payment timing is disconnected from delivery or acceptance.
  • Broad obligations such as "all losses" or "best efforts" are undefined.
  • 仅有权利，却无对应的义务或救济措施。
  • 责任条款未与具体违约行为关联。
  • 验收标准主观或缺失。
  • 付款时间与交付或验收脱节。
  • 「全部损失」或「最大努力」等宽泛义务未作定义。

Agent instruction:

Agent指令：

For clause review, map the clause into prerequisite, right/obligation, and liability consequence. If any point is missing, propose revised language or a drafting instruction. Cite 
contract-drafting-quotes.md#three-points-one-line-method
or 
contract-review-quotes.md#three-points-one-line
.
条款审查时，将条款拆解为前提条件、权利/义务、责任后果三个部分。如果缺少任一要点，提出修改后的文本或起草指引。解释三点一线法时，需引用
contract-drafting-quotes.md#three-points-one-line-method
或
contract-review-quotes.md#three-points-one-line
。

DIMENSION 5: Review, Submit, and Risk Communication

维度5：审查、输出与风险沟通

The Rule: A contract review is incomplete until macro, meso, and micro findings are checked together and communicated in a usable form.
规则： 只有将宏观、中观和微观层面的发现合并校验，并以可用的形式传达给用户，合同审查才算完整。

Key questions to ask:

需询问的关键问题：

  • Do the proposed revisions support the user's business goal?
  • Are the highest-risk issues separated from minor wording issues?
  • Does the user need redlines, a risk memo, negotiation positions, or a final signing checklist?
  • Are assumptions, missing facts, and unresolved legal questions clearly marked?
  • Should any issue be escalated to licensed counsel, tax advisors, regulatory counsel, or business decision-makers?
  • 提出的修改建议是否支持用户的商业目标？
  • 高风险问题是否与细微措辞问题区分开？
  • 用户需要的是修订痕迹版、风险备忘录、谈判立场还是最终签署清单？
  • 假设、缺失事实和未解决的法律问题是否已明确标注？
  • 是否有问题需要升级至执业律师、税务顾问、合规律师或商业决策者？

Decision criteria / Checklist:

判定标准 / 检查清单：

  • Re-check consistency across transaction structure, document form, and clauses.
  • Rank risks by severity and negotiability.
  • Provide exact amendment suggestions where possible.
  • Mark business decisions separately from legal defects.
  • Include signing formalities: names, seals, authority, dates, copies, annexes, electronic records.
  • Preserve a written trail for major risk warnings.
  • 重新校验交易结构、文件形式和条款之间的一致性。
  • 按严重程度和可谈判性对风险排序。
  • 尽可能提供明确的修改建议。
  • 将商业决策与法律瑕疵分开标注。
  • 包含签署手续：名称、盖章、授权、日期、份数、附件、电子记录。
  • 对重大风险警示保留书面记录。

Warning signals:

警示信号：

  • A long list of comments without prioritization.
  • Treating minor drafting issues as deal blockers.
  • Failing to document major risk warnings.
  • Delivering clause edits without explaining business impact.
  • 意见清单冗长，但未划分优先级。
  • 将细微的起草问题视为交易障碍。
  • 未对重大风险警示进行记录。
  • 仅提供条款修改，却未解释商业影响。

Agent instruction:

Agent指令：

End every review with a prioritized risk summary and next-action list. If the user needs a negotiation posture, classify each issue as 
must change
, 
should change
, 
fallback
, or 
business call
. Cite 
contract-drafting-quotes.md#review-checklist
or 
contract-review-quotes.md#comprehensive-review
.
每次审查的结尾，需提供按优先级排序的风险总结和下一步行动清单。如果用户需要谈判立场，将每个问题归类为
必须修改
、
应当修改
、
可让步
或
商业决策项
。引用
contract-drafting-quotes.md#review-checklist
或
contract-review-quotes.md#comprehensive-review
。

Query Response Framework

查询响应框架

Query Type 1: Review a contract

查询类型1：合同审查

  1. State assumptions and missing facts.
  2. Identify contract type and user role.
  3. Apply macro transaction-structure review.
  4. Apply meso contract-structure review.
  5. Apply micro clause review using three-points-one-line.
  6. Rank risks and provide revision suggestions.
  7. End with signing or negotiation next steps.
  1. 说明假设和缺失事实。
  2. 明确合同类型和用户角色。
  3. 开展宏观交易结构审查。
  4. 开展中观合同结构审查。
  5. 运用三点一线法开展微观条款审查。
  6. 对风险排序并提供修改建议。
  7. 最后给出签署或谈判的下一步建议。

Query Type 2: Draft a contract or contract outline

查询类型2：合同起草或合同大纲起草

  1. Confirm transaction goal, parties, subject, price, timeline, and risk posture.
  2. Design the macro transaction structure.
  3. Select the contract form and document architecture.
  4. Produce a clause framework with key drafting points.
  5. List open questions and required supporting documents.
  1. 确认交易目标、主体、标的、价格、时间线和风险偏好。
  2. 设计宏观交易结构。
  3. 选择合同形式和文件架构。
  4. 输出条款框架及关键起草要点。
  5. 列出待确认问题和所需支持文件。

Query Type 3: Rewrite or evaluate a clause

查询类型3：条款改写或评估

  1. Identify the clause's function.
  2. Map prerequisite, rights/obligations, and liability consequences.
  3. Identify ambiguity, gaps, or overreach.
  4. Provide revised language or a drafting direction.
  5. State residual risks and negotiation notes.
  1. 明确条款的功能。
  2. 拆解前提条件、权利/义务和责任后果。
  3. 识别歧义、漏洞或过度要求。
  4. 提供修改后的文本或起草方向。
  5. 说明剩余风险和谈判注意事项。

Query Type 4: Pre-signing checklist

查询类型4：签署前检查清单

  1. Confirm final draft and parties.
  2. Check macro authority, approvals, and subject matter.
  3. Check meso document consistency and annexes.
  4. Check micro key clauses and signing formalities.
  5. Provide a go/no-go checklist.
  1. 确认最终草案和主体。
  2. 检查宏观层面的授权、审批和标的。
  3. 检查中观层面的文件一致性和附件。
  4. 检查微观层面的关键条款和签署手续。
  5. 提供可签署/不可签署检查清单。

Output Format

输出格式

Contract Review Memo

合同审查备忘录

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

合同审查意见

合同审查意见

合同类型: [type] 我方角色: [role] 适用法律假设: [China law / unknown / user-specified] 资料完整性: [complete / missing items]
合同类型: [type] 我方角色: [role] 适用法律假设: [China law / unknown / user-specified] 资料完整性: [complete / missing items]

一、宏观 - 交易结构

一、宏观 - 交易结构

项目结论风险建议
项目结论风险建议

二、中观 - 合同结构

二、中观 - 合同结构

项目结论风险建议
项目结论风险建议

三、微观 - 条款审查

三、微观 - 条款审查

条款问题修改建议优先级
条款问题修改建议优先级

四、主要风险排序

四、主要风险排序

  1. [High-risk issue]
  2. [Medium-risk issue]
  1. [High-risk issue]
  2. [Medium-risk issue]

五、下一步

五、下一步

[Redline / negotiate / ask for documents / counsel review / signing checklist]
undefined
[Redline / negotiate / ask for documents / counsel review / signing checklist]
undefined

Contract Drafting Outline

合同起草大纲

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

合同起草提纲

合同起草提纲

交易目标: [goal] 当事方: [parties] 标的: [subject]
交易目标: [goal] 当事方: [parties] 标的: [subject]

一、交易结构设计

一、交易结构设计

[Macro structure and required approvals.]
[Macro structure and required approvals.]

二、合同形式

二、合同形式

[Document type and structure.]
[Document type and structure.]

三、条款框架（三点一线）

三、条款框架（三点一线）

模块应写内容待确认事项
模块应写内容待确认事项

四、风险与谈判点

四、风险与谈判点

[Must-have terms and fallback positions.]
undefined
[Must-have terms and fallback positions.]
undefined

Clause Rewrite Output

条款改写输出

markdown
undefined
markdown
undefined

条款审查与改写

条款审查与改写

条款功能

条款功能

[What this clause is supposed to do.]
[What this clause is supposed to do.]

三点一线检查

三点一线检查

点是否完整问题
点是否完整问题

修改建议

修改建议

[Revised clause or drafting instruction.]
[Revised clause or drafting instruction.]

剩余风险

剩余风险

[What still needs business/legal confirmation.]
undefined
[What still needs business/legal confirmation.]
undefined

Critical Reminders

重要提醒

  1. Promote the transaction while controlling risk; do not make risk minimization the only goal.
  2. Always analyze macro before meso and meso before micro.
  3. Contract structure and clause wording must serve the real transaction, not the template.
  4. Separate legal defects, business risks, and negotiable preferences.
  5. Do not claim current legal validity without current-law verification.
  6. Do not fabricate missing facts; ask concise follow-up questions or state assumptions.
  7. This skill provides structured drafting and review support, not formal legal advice.
  1. 在控制风险的同时促进交易，不得将风险最小化作为唯一目标。
  2. 始终按宏观→中观→微观的顺序分析。
  3. 合同结构和条款表述必须服务于真实交易，而非模板。
  4. 区分法律瑕疵、商业风险和可谈判的偏好。
  5. 未核实现行法律的情况下，不得主张当前法律效力。
  6. 不得虚构缺失事实；应提出简洁的跟进问题或说明假设。
  7. 本Skill提供结构化的起草和审查支持，不构成正式法律意见。