{"id":17279,"plugin_id":"plugins_6a75dc82c0fc81919985d8f2dc208355","kind":"skill","collection_source":null,"comparison_source":null,"observed_at":"2026-09-30T23:14:05.064Z","digest":"0300e3e8b21dddcdafb01fa319809f710331f7b38b006f27c2a6803ed9b23c04","against":null,"payload":{"description":"Analyse claims, defences, replies, counterclaims, amendments, and particulars for causes of action, admissions, denials, inconsistencies, missing facts, affirmative defences, burdens, and issues for determination. Use during early case assessment, amendment, disclosure, witness preparation, or trial planning.","included_files":[{"relative_path":"agents/openai.yaml","size_in_bytes":306}],"name":"pleadings-analyst","skill_md_contents":"---\nname: pleadings-analyst\ndescription: >-\n  Analyse claims, defences, replies, counterclaims, amendments, and particulars\n  for causes of action, admissions, denials, inconsistencies, missing facts,\n  affirmative defences, burdens, and issues for determination. Use during early\n  case assessment, amendment, disclosure, witness preparation, or trial planning.\n---\n\n# Pleadings Analyst\n\nRead the operative pleadings paragraph by paragraph and preserve the difference\nbetween allegation, admission, denial, non-admission, positive case, and evidence.\n\n## Intake\n\nObtain the jurisdiction and forum, all pleading versions, filing and service\ndates, orders and amendments, causes of action and relief, contracts or statutes\nincorporated by reference, particulars, admissions, procedural rules, limitation\nposition, and the client's current factual instructions.\n\n## Analysis method\n\n1. Identify the operative version, parties, capacities, jurisdictional basis,\n   procedural posture, verification, and relief claimed.\n2. Break each cause, defence, counterclaim, and reply into required elements,\n   burden, standard, and pleaded material facts.\n3. Map every numbered allegation to the responsive paragraph and classify the\n   response as admission, partial admission, denial, non-admission, avoidance,\n   inconsistent alternative, or no response.\n4. Distinguish a material fact from evidence, law, submission, conclusion, and remedy.\n5. Identify missing elements, inadequate particulars, ambiguity, internal\n   contradiction, impermissible general denial, departure, new matter, and\n   inconsistency across related proceedings.\n6. Record formal and deemed admissions, concessions, notices to admit, and facts\n   not genuinely disputed, subject to current forum rules.\n7. Test standing, capacity, jurisdiction, limitation, conditions precedent,\n   causation, loss, mitigation, affirmative defences, set-off, contribution,\n   counterclaim, and available relief.\n8. Link each live factual proposition to evidence, witness, disclosure request,\n   expert issue, and evidential gap.\n9. Identify amendment, strike-out, summary disposition, particulars, reply,\n   joinder, bifurcation, or issue-narrowing options without assuming availability.\n10. Draft neutral issues for determination that reflect both parties' cases.\n\n## Output\n\nProvide a pleading map, element-and-burden table, admission and denial schedule,\ninconsistency list, missing-fact and particulars list, live-issue matrix,\nevidence and disclosure plan, and procedural recommendations.\n\n## Guardrails\n\nDo not treat allegation as evidence, silence as admission without a verified\nrule, or alternative pleading as factual dishonesty. Do not overlook superseded\nversions, amendments, privilege, confidentiality, sanctions, or verification\nduties. Confirm local pleading standards and deadlines before action.\n"},"changes":[],"summary":"First saved snapshot. No earlier version is available for comparison.","summary_kind":"deterministic","summary_metadata":{}}