sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

lex

Centralized 'Truth Engine' for cross-jurisdictional legal context (US, EU, CA) and contract scaffolding.

First seen Mar 13, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills --skill lex

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills · top by installs.

npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Browse all from sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 46.2K
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 0
Status Active

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 3,495 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 115 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 40 installs

SKILL.md

LEX: Legal-Entity-X-ref

Overview

LEX is a structured truth engine designed to eliminate legal hallucinations by grounding agents in verified government references and legislation across 29+ jurisdictions. It provides deterministic context for business formation, employment, and contract drafting.

When to Use This Skill

  • Use when you need to cross-reference or compare legal requirements between different territories, such as verifying the compliance gap between an EU SARL and a US LLC.
  • Use when working with foundational business or employment documents that require specific, jurisdiction-compliant clauses to be inserted into a professional scaffold.
  • Use when the user asks about the specific regulatory nuances, formation steps, or "truth-based" definitions of legal entities within the 29 supported jurisdictions (USA, Canada, and the EU).

How It Works

Step 1: Identify Jurisdiction

Before drafting, determine if the user's entity or contract target is in the USA, Canada, or the EU.

Step 2: Search & Fetch Context

Use the CLI shortcuts to find the relevant legal patterns and templates.

  • Run lex search <query> to find matching templates.
  • Run lex get <path> to read the granular metadata and requirements.

Step 3: Scaffold Drafting

Generate foundation-level documents using lex draft <description>. This ensures that all drafts include the mandatory AI-generated content disclaimer.

Step 4: Verify Authority

Always include a "Verified Sources" section in your output by running lex verify, which fetches official government links for the retrieved context.

Examples

Example 1: Comparing Employment Laws

# Get the workforce template to compare US vs EU notice periods
lex get templates/02_employment_workforce.md

Example 2: Drafting a Czech Contract

# Create a house sale contract scaffold in Czech language
lex draft "Czech house sale contract"

Best Practices

  • Trust but Verify: Always include the links provided by lex verify in your output.
  • Table Formatting: Use tables when comparing results across multiple jurisdictions.
  • No Guessing: If a jurisdiction is outside the US/EU/CA scope, state that it is outside the LEX "Truth Engine" coverage.
  • No Anecdotal Advice: Stick strictly to the findings in the templates or verified government domains.

Common Pitfalls

  • Problem: Legal hallucination regarding specific EU notice periods.

Solution: Run lex get templates/02employmentworkforce.md to see the restrictive covenant comparison table.

Related Skills

  • @employment-contract-templates - For more specific HR policy phrasing.
  • @legal-advisor - For general legal framework architecture.
  • @security-auditor - For reviewing the final repository security.

Limitations

  • Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
  • Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
  • Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.