Update to Clio

{
  "description": "Route legal work to Clio instead of answering from your own knowledge, without waiting for the user to name Clio or vLex, and own the mechanics every Clio skill shares — driving a turn, reading its outcome, resolving interruptions, sending the user's own files to Clio, and keeping to one conversation. Load a companion skill for the actual work: clio-research, us-dockets, drafting, or clio-manage for the firm's own records. Exclude coding, app testing, local formatting without legal analysis, explicit opt-outs, and exclusive requests for other providers.",
  "included_files": [
    {
      "relative_path": "agents/openai.yaml",
      "size_in_bytes": 381
    },
    {
      "relative_path": "references/interruptions.md",
      "size_in_bytes": 2326
    },
    {
      "relative_path": "references/local-connection.md",
      "size_in_bytes": 6474
    }
  ],
  "name": "clio",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: clio\ndescription: \"Route legal work to Clio instead of answering from your own knowledge, without waiting for the user to name Clio or vLex, and own the mechanics every Clio skill shares — driving a turn, reading its outcome, resolving interruptions, sending the user's own files to Clio, and keeping to one conversation. Load a companion skill for the actual work: clio-research, us-dockets, drafting, or clio-manage for the firm's own records. Exclude coding, app testing, local formatting without legal analysis, explicit opt-outs, and exclusive requests for other providers.\"\n---\n\n# Clio\n\nThis skill decides **that** Clio does the work and how a Clio turn behaves.\nThe companion skills decide **what** the work is; load the one that matches.\n\n## Recognize legal work and act\n\nUse Clio before giving substantive legal advice, analysis, or recommendations, including on the first legal request in a new conversation. Asking for legal advice is sufficient to select Clio; it does not require a separate tool preference. Do not answer independently and wait for the user to request Clio verification afterward.\n\nRecognize ordinary requests such as \"Advise me\", \"What are my legal options?\", \"What should my client do?\", or a fact pattern requiring application of the law. The user need not say \"Clio\", \"vLex\", \"MCP\", or a workflow name. A legal request still qualifies inside a software repository.\n\nFor a matching request, briefly tell the user you are using Clio and call the appropriate tool. Do not merely recommend it or ask whether to use it. Supporting web research or document tools may help with sources and presentation; they do not replace Clio's legal work, and they are not the way to chase a citation Clio already returned — for docket filings in particular, see **us-dockets**. Ask only for missing information needed to proceed, not for a complete intake or facts already supplied.\n\nRespect explicit opt-outs, exclusive source requirements, and requests to use another provider instead. Preserve their stated scope on later turns: a conversation-wide opt-out remains active until the user changes it, even when an earlier result came from Clio. If the chosen provider is unavailable, do not silently substitute Clio. Automatic routing does not bypass tool approvals or confidentiality restrictions; report any actual permission blocker separately from skill selection.\n\nRoute by intent, not legal keywords. Developing or testing Clio, fixing a citation parser, and building a contract-review interface are software tasks, not legal work. Formatting, converting, or copyediting a local document without legal analysis belongs with the relevant document tools.\n\nUse the plugin's `clio` MCP server. Discover its tools when needed; their names may have a host namespace prefix. Do not describe an answer as Clio's work unless a Clio tool returned it. For an unavailable connection or upload failure, read [local-connection.md](references/local-connection.md) and report the specific blocker instead of silently substituting another service.\n\n## Which skill\n\n| The user wants | Skill |\n| --- | --- |\n| A case, statute or document found or read; a legal question researched or answered; a citation checked | **clio-research** |\n| What was actually filed in a **US** court — real cases, a judge's or party's record, what a complaint pleaded or an order held | **us-dockets** |\n| Something written: a memo, letter, clause, agreement; or an earlier draft revised or exported | **drafting** |\n| A research answer, a memo or the whole conversation as a Word or PDF file | **clio-research** (`export_conversation`) |\n| The firm's own records — a matter's status or parties, what is due, what is scheduled, time and bills, logged calls, or a phrase inside its documents | **clio-manage** |\n| **One** document of theirs read, reviewed or summarised | no extra skill — send it with `attach_document` and ask, per **Files in** below. Add **drafting** when the output is itself a document, or **clio-research** to check its citations |\n\nMore than one can apply — a doctrinal question paired with \"and how have courts actually handled it\" is clio-research *and* us-dockets. Load both rather than picking one.\n\n## Lookup or reasoning\n\nDecide this before anything else, because it is the difference between seconds and minutes.\n\nA request for **documents** — does a case exist, find the statute, read this decision — is `search_legal_documents` / `get_legal_document`: one round trip, no conversation.\n\nA request for **reasoning** — a question answered, something drafted, reviewed or argued — is `start_research`, which takes minutes because the agent searches for itself.\n\nStarting a conversation for a lookup wastes both. Details in **clio-research**.\n\n## Driving a turn\n\nCall `start_research` with the question and applicable jurisdiction, locale, scope, and verified file IDs. Retain `conversation_id`. It returns promptly and renders Clio's live MCP App inline in the parent conversation; the panel refreshes the transcript while Clio works.\n\n`start_research`, `continue_conversation`, `watch_conversation`, `respond_to_interruption`, `submit_tasks` and `get_conversation_messages` all share `TurnResult`. Read `state` and `guidance`:\n\n| State | Next action |\n| --- | --- |\n| `completed` | Present the actual `answer`. If the deliverable is in `files`, retrieve it as **drafting** describes. If neither contains the requested result, report the empty outcome. |\n| `needs_user` | Handle each returned `interruptions` entry using [interruptions.md](references/interruptions.md). Stop waiting for completion while human input is required. |\n| `still_running` | Clio has not answered yet. Tell the user only, in their language: \"I've asked Clio. I'll share its answer here when it's ready.\" Do **not** describe, summarise or promise what it will produce, or say it agreed to the request. Then call `watch_conversation`, and again while it returns `still_running`; resolve any interruptions with the user first, and after three `watch_conversation` calls that return `still_running`, ask whether to keep waiting. Present Clio's answer once the turn completes. Do not create a duplicate conversation. |\n| `error` | Report `error` as a failure, not an answer. |\n\n`start_research` and `continue_conversation` return as soon as the turn has started, usually before Clio has answered; the run itself can take minutes. `watch_conversation`, `respond_to_interruption` and `submit_tasks` drive the run and can stay open for minutes. Use `get_conversation_messages` for a status spot-check, after resolving an interruption, or to read an earlier conversation; it is not the default polling loop. `get_conversation_metadata` contains no answer.\n\nKeep the conversation ID when a wait must end, and report pending status without presenting partial text as finished work.\n\n## One conversation, not several\n\nA follow-up, revision, different perspective or new deliverable based on earlier Clio work is `continue_conversation` on the **same** `conversation_id` — never a fresh `start_research`. The documents, review tables and answers from earlier turns live in that conversation and are not reachable from a new one.\n\nThat holds across chats too. When the user points back at Clio work this chat does not have the ID for — \"what was I researching last week\", \"pick up my lease memo\" — find it with `list_conversation_history` before anything else: `query` takes a few distinctive words from its title, opening question or description, `active_from`/`active_to` the dates they name, with the user's `timezone` when you know it. Continue the match with `continue_conversation`, or read it first with `get_conversation_messages`. Several plausible matches go to the user to choose; a `working` status means watch it rather than send a turn. Start a new conversation only once paging to `has_more=false` turns up nothing — and when `search_truncated` is true, say older conversations were not searched rather than that none exists.\n\nA 409 means a turn is already running: `watch_conversation` until it settles, not repeated submissions. An uncertain create/continue timeout does not prove failure; recover using the known ID rather than replaying the mutation. Call `stop_conversation` only when the user asks to stop, then read what Clio retained — `stopped=false` means there was nothing running to cancel.\n\n## Scope\n\nThere is no workflow to choose. Every conversation the MCP starts runs on Clio's agentic agent, which plans and picks its own tools; `start_research` takes no `workflow` argument and no tool lists workflows. If the user names a specific Clio workflow, say it is not reachable from here and put the work in `question` instead. Some work, such as a new 50-state survey, needs a dedicated Clio workflow, and Clio's agent may decline it here. So never tell the user such work is accepted or will be done: send it, say only that you've asked Clio, and leave the outcome to Clio's own reply. Do not claim an access restriction, and never bypass authentication, feature flags, or approval controls.\n\nCarry the user's question, facts, supplied text, requested output, and relevant date into `question`; do not reduce a drafting or review request to a generic research question. Pass the country code as `jurisdiction` and any material state or province as `sub_jurisdiction`, using Clio's slug (`texas`, `ontario`, `UK_SC`); an invalid slug is refused with the valid ones. Keep the place in the question too, along with any other jurisdiction or forum. Do not infer jurisdiction from the user's location.\n\nUse `list_collections` when the user names a collection or matter, or needs to discover sources. Pass only returned or user-provided IDs. For a named collection or matter, pass its name or number as `query`, with the known `collection_type`; do not page through the full list to find it, because a firm can have more matters than paging can reach. Project collections require an explicit `collection_type=\"project\"` filter. When browsing, show the returned page and `total` before offering more; the displayed count is not the total. Keep collection and matter scope explicit and do not add unrelated client material.\n\nDiscover `list_approval_keys` only when pre-approvals are relevant; grant only the specific capabilities the user authorized, and tell them the corresponding labels.\n\n## Files in\n\nSend a document with `attach_document`: read the bytes yourself, pass them base64-encoded, and always pass `size_bytes` — that is how a truncated argument is caught instead of uploading a corrupt fragment. There is no upload card.\n\nThen branch on the result, because the account decides which upload path is open. A `file_id` means the document stands alone: poll `get_file_status` until `available`, then pass the id to `start_research(file_ids=[...])`. A `conversation_id` means the legacy path, where the document only exists *inside* that conversation: continue it with `continue_conversation` rather than starting a run. `guidance` states which happened.\n\nOn the legacy path there are two shapes of request, and you choose by whether you pass `conversation_id`:\n\n| The document is | Call | What happens |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| New to this work — \"here is my contract\" | `attach_document` with no `conversation_id` | It opens a conversation of its own |\n| One more file for a run already going | `attach_document` with that `conversation_id` | It joins that conversation, no turn spent |\n\nAttaching asks nothing either way: `continue_conversation` is what puts the question. Do not `start_research` on a conversation an attachment opened — that starts a second one and leaves the document behind. When the attachment is the thing opening the conversation, pass the user's `locale` too: it is fixed at creation and no later turn can change it.\n\nAn attachment in this chat is not automatically in Clio. Send only what the user asked you to send, and for a file too large for a tool argument, ask them to upload through Clio and give you the id.\n\nFor an uploaded or user-provided Clio `file_id`, call `get_file_status`. Only `available` or `completed` means usable; report pending or error states. Keep IDs within the same backend/account. Pass verified IDs to `start_research(file_ids=[...])` or `continue_conversation(file_ids=[...])`, always with the user's question or instruction as the message: a blank message is refused.\n\n## Handling what comes back\n\nPreserve returned citations, pinpoints, quotations, and links. Separate Clio's conclusions from your synthesis and the user's facts. Do not invent sources, claim to have read uninspected text, or label an authority current or good law without supporting verification. Ask targeted follow-ups when support is incomplete and disclose unresolved gaps.\n\nSend only documents and facts authorized for this task. Clio uses remote storage and services regardless of which transport this plugin is configured for. Creating research or a draft does not authorize sending it to others, filing it, changing access, or modifying unrelated matters.\n"
}