{"id":17272,"plugin_id":"plugins_6a75dc82c0fc81919985d8f2dc208355","kind":"skill","collection_source":null,"comparison_source":null,"observed_at":"2026-09-30T23:14:04.926Z","digest":"093d493a1ca31325e0af4df6f399d7c4da4abc7b94a13ecf3e730172a936c12f","against":null,"payload":{"description":"Draft evidence-backed applications for interim injunctions, stays, preservation, disclosure, security, attachment, receivership, interim payment, or other temporary relief. Use when urgency, notice, candour, undertakings, proportionality, and a workable draft order are central.","included_files":[{"relative_path":"agents/openai.yaml","size_in_bytes":322}],"name":"interim-application-drafter","skill_md_contents":"---\nname: interim-application-drafter\ndescription: >-\n  Draft evidence-backed applications for interim injunctions, stays,\n  preservation, disclosure, security, attachment, receivership, interim payment,\n  or other temporary relief. Use when urgency, notice, candour, undertakings,\n  proportionality, and a workable draft order are central.\n---\n\n# Interim Application Drafter\n\nDraft for the actual relief and current procedural route. Treat without-notice,\nfreezing, search, anti-suit, and other exceptional orders as specialist matters.\n\n## Intake\n\nObtain the forum and jurisdiction, live or proposed proceeding, pleaded right,\ntarget conduct or asset, evidence, chronology, urgency, notice history, status\nquo, harm, balance, respondent impact, third parties, undertakings, security,\nparallel proceedings, service logistics, and requested duration.\n\n## Drafting method\n\n1. Verify jurisdiction, power, standing, procedural vehicle, filing rules,\n   notice requirement, service, evidence form, fee, deadline, and appeal or review route.\n2. State the precise legal test and map each limb to admissible evidence.\n3. Explain urgency with dated events and why ordinary case management is inadequate.\n4. Define the status quo and distinguish preventable interim harm from harm\n   remediable by damages, final relief, or a narrower measure.\n5. Assess merits only to the degree required by the applicable test.\n6. Address adequacy of damages, irreparable harm, balance of convenience or\n   hardship, public interest, delay, clean hands, proportionality, and third-party effects.\n7. For without-notice relief, explain why notice is impracticable or self-defeating,\n   make full and frank disclosure of material adverse facts, and propose prompt return.\n8. Offer required undertakings, cross-undertakings, security, preservation,\n   reporting, carve-outs, supervision, confidentiality, and duration.\n9. Draft an order that is clear, enforceable, no broader than necessary, and\n   workable for parties, banks, platforms, custodians, and third parties.\n10. Align the application, affidavit or statement, exhibits, chronology,\n    authorities, oral note, service plan, and draft order.\n\n## Output\n\nProvide the application, supporting-evidence outline, legal-test matrix,\nurgency and notice note, adverse-fact schedule, undertakings, draft order,\nservice plan, hearing checklist, and return-date calendar.\n\n## Guardrails\n\nDo not conceal adverse facts, exaggerate urgency, seek punitive restraints, or\nuse interim process for improper leverage. Do not request asset restraint,\nsearch, disclosure, or speech restrictions without a clear legal basis and\nspecialist review. Recheck local rules and judge-specific directions before filing.\n"},"changes":[],"summary":"First saved snapshot. No earlier version is available for comparison.","summary_kind":"deterministic","summary_metadata":{}}