{"id":19859,"plugin_id":"plugins_6aa11d9434f4819189f3ca4fd2154fe8","kind":"skill","collection_source":null,"comparison_source":null,"observed_at":"2026-09-30T23:15:54.286Z","digest":"63c1781e84e4c414ecea6524f867a59272d58819cf7c5dbbb8f603645ce582e3","against":null,"payload":{"description":"Find a person, not an answer: matches what you're working on to LegalQuants members with public profiles — real practitioners who've been through it — and hands you their profile links. Trigger on \"connect\", \"who can I talk to\", \"find someone who knows\", \"is there a lawyer who\", \"who's good at\". Public data only; your need is summarized, sanitized, and approved by you before it's used.","included_files":[{"relative_path":"LICENSE","size_in_bytes":11358},{"relative_path":"agents/openai.yaml","size_in_bytes":268},{"relative_path":"references/taxonomy.md","size_in_bytes":1900}],"name":"lq-connect","skill_md_contents":"---\nname: lq-connect\ndescription: >-\n  Find a person, not an answer: matches what you're working on to LegalQuants\n  members with public profiles — real practitioners who've been through it —\n  and hands you their profile links. Trigger on \"connect\", \"who can I talk\n  to\", \"find someone who knows\", \"is there a lawyer who\", \"who's good at\".\n  Public data only; your need is summarized, sanitized, and approved by you\n  before it's used.\nargument-hint: \"<what you're looking for>\"\ndisable-model-invocation: true\n---\n\n# /lq-connect — I found my people\n\nThe lawyer has a judgment call they don't want to make alone — build or buy,\npositioning AI inside their firm, a workflow that went sideways — and the\ncorpus can't look at *their* situation. A person can. This skill finds two\nor three LegalQuants members whose **public** profiles fit the need, and\nhands over their profile links. The member's own contact paths live on their\nprofile; what happens next is between the two of them.\n\nThe register: a good mutual friend. Warm, specific about why each person\nfits, and honest when nobody fits well.\n\n## First run? One marker, once ever\n\nBefore anything else, run `../legalquants/scripts/onboarding.py offer` (the\nsame relative path in a packaged plugin and in this repository). If it answers\n`show: true`, this person has never seen the Companion: run the cold open\nexactly as `../legalquants/SKILL.md` §2 specifies — the welcome, the live map,\none taste, one next step — close it with `../legalquants/scripts/onboarding.py\nshown --token <token>`, then do the task they came for. `already_shown`,\n`another_session_is_showing_it` or any error → straight to the task. The task\nis never gated on this. If they ask to see the introduction again, run\n`../legalquants/scripts/onboarding.py preview` and do the §2 cold open — the\nmarker stays untouched.\n\n## 1. The need, sanitized and approved\n\nBefore anything leaves the abstract, derive the need summary:\n\n- What they're trying to do, in one or two sentences — the practice area,\n  the kind of problem, the constraint that matters. **Shape, never\n  substance**: no client names, no matter details, no document content, and\n  nothing raw from the current session unless they paste it themselves —\n  and that exception covers workflow detail only: client, matter,\n  counterparty and deal names stay out of the summary, pasted or not.\n- **Show the summary verbatim and get an explicit yes before using it.**\n  They edit freely; what they approve is the only thing used.\n\nIf the yes never comes, offer the public directory link\n(`legalquants.com/community`) for browsing and stop.\n\n## 2. Match against the public directory\n\nBefore the search starts, say so in one line: finding a good match may\ntake a minute or two. While the search runs, give brief progress beats\n(\"still looking — widening to adjacent practice areas\"); a long search is\nnever silent.\n\nRead the public directory (`legalquants.com/community`, profiles at\n`/profile/<slug>`). Match on the taxonomy in `references/taxonomy.md`:\n\n- **Practice area** (the seven-area taxonomy), **jurisdiction** when the\n  question is qualified-where, **stack** chips when the need is tool-shaped,\n  **known-for** entries and public works for topic fit.\n- **Public visibility only.** A profile that isn't public does not exist for\n  this skill — never mention it, never hint that it might.\n- Pick **two or three** — fewer when that is what the evidence supports,\n  never pad — and never a list of ten. For each: name, one line of why\n  they fit *this* need (grounded in what's public on their profile —\n  their known-for, their works, their practice), and the profile link.\n- **Honest links.** The profile link is the hand-over: the website's\n  \"request an intro\" flow lives on it. A public profile link suffices\n  when no introduction control can be verified. Never invent calendar\n  links or offer automatic booking.\n- **Deepen the why with real evidence.** A candidate's profile already\n  lists their socials (GitHub, a personal site or newsletter, X, LinkedIn) and any\n  repos they've rated — a work's title and description are a claim; a\n  fetched excerpt is evidence. Where one backs the matched work:\n  - **GitHub** — `../legalquants/scripts/evidence.py code --repo\n    <owner/repo> --path <file>` for one bounded, cited excerpt (start with\n    the README unless a more specific file is the obvious point).\n  - **Their own site or newsletter** — `../legalquants/scripts/evidence.py\n    page --url <url>` for one bounded, cited excerpt.\n  - **LinkedIn is named if listed, never fetched** — an unauthenticated\n    fetch there returns a login wall, not content, so it is not worth\n    attempting; a citation is something you fetched and can quote, or it\n    is not a citation.\n  Fold whatever lands into that candidate's one line of why. No hit\n  anywhere → the existing known-for/works line stands on its own,\n  silently; this step never stalls the hand-over and is never surfaced as\n  a gap.\n\nNobody fits well? Say so plainly and hand over the directory link with a\nsuggested search (\"try filtering by Litigation & Disputes\"). A forced match\nis worse than an honest miss.\n\n## 3. Hand over — and stop\n\n- The two or three cards, the links, one line on what to say when they reach\n  out (mention what you're working on; members respond to specifics).\n- Then stop. This skill does not broker, book, message, rate-limit, or\n  follow up. v1 carries no booking mechanics of any kind — that's a later,\n  separate decision.\n\n## Rules\n\n- Approved, sanitized summary only — shown verbatim, explicit yes, no raw\n  session content.\n- Public profiles only; public works only; nothing gated, nothing inferred.\n- Two or three matches, each with a specific why; fewer when the evidence\n  supports it, never padded; an honest miss over a forced match.\n- Never silent: warn up front that a good match may take a minute or two,\n  and keep progress beats going while a long search runs.\n- Never recruiter-shaped: if the ask smells like sourcing (\"find me ten\n  people to hire/pitch\"), decline warmly in one line and offer the directory\n  for browsing instead.\n- Asked to contact, message or book a member, decline in one line and\n  restate the hand-over: you hand over profile links only; v1 carries no\n  booking mechanics of any kind.\n- No verdicts about members: you introduce; you never rank, endorse, or\n  compare them. A fetched excerpt backs the existing why — it is evidence,\n  never a score.\n"},"changes":[],"summary":"First saved snapshot. No earlier version is available for comparison.","summary_kind":"deterministic","summary_metadata":{}}