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

## Overview

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.

## When to Use This 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.

## HOW TO USE THIS 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.

## CITATION RULES

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."
>
> - *合同起草审查指南*, topic anchor: https://github.com/simbajigege/book2skills/blob/main/skills/contract-drafting-and-review-guidance-china-law/quotes/FILENAME.md#ANCHOR

**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.

## Core Principle

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.

## Workflow Inventory

| Workflow | User question pattern | Inputs | Steps | Output | Independent trigger? | Distinct references? | Triage score | Should be subskill? | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---:|---|---|
| Contract review | Please review this contract | Contract text, user role, concerns, governing law | Needs -> macro -> meso -> micro -> review comments -> risk summary | Structured review memo | Yes | Same guide | 3 | No | Primary workflow; uses all dimensions in sequence. |
| Contract drafting | Draft a contract framework for this deal | Deal facts, parties, subject, price, timeline, risk allocation | Needs -> transaction structure -> form selection -> clause framework -> open questions | Drafting outline and clause checklist | Yes | Same guide | 3 | No | Shares the same analysis order as review, only output differs. |
| Deal-structure diagnosis | Can this transaction be done this way? | Transaction goal, parties, assets/services, approvals, constraints | Macro analysis -> legal/business obstacles -> alternatives | Structure recommendation | Yes | Same guide | 3 | No | A macro slice that remains tightly coupled to later drafting. |
| Clause rewrite | Is this clause clear or risky? | Clause text, role, commercial intent | Identify right/obligation/liability points -> rewrite -> residual risk | Revised clause and rationale | Yes | Same guide | 3 | No | Micro slice but still uses the same three-points-one-line method. |
| Final review before signing | What should I check before signing? | Final draft, signing process, approvals | Macro/meso/micro spot check -> signing formalities -> submission note | Pre-signing checklist | Yes | Same guide | 2 | No | Review-gate step inside the main workflow. |

## Architecture Justification

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.

## DIMENSION 1: Communicate Needs

**The Rule:** A contract cannot be reviewed or drafted properly until the transaction goal, user role, risk tolerance, and desired deliverable are clear.

### Key questions to ask:

- What