Update to EULEX.AI

{
  "description": "Compare statutory rights or obligations across two or more named supported jurisdictions, including EU-versus-national law, employment, contractual liability and compliance requirements. Retrieve evidence for each jurisdiction and report differences and coverage gaps. Do not treat the absence of a search result as the absence of a rule.",
  "included_files": [
    {
      "relative_path": "agents/openai.yaml",
      "size_in_bytes": 2314
    }
  ],
  "name": "cross-border-comparison",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: cross-border-comparison\ndescription: Compare statutory rights or obligations across two or more named supported jurisdictions, including EU-versus-national law, employment, contractual liability and compliance requirements. Retrieve evidence for each jurisdiction and report differences and coverage gaps. Do not treat the absence of a search result as the absence of a rule.\nlicense: Proprietary\nmetadata:\n  author: Augment Ltd\n  version: \"1.3.14\"\n  compatibility: Requires the connected and authorised EULEX.AI MCP server.\n---\n\n# Compare jurisdictions\n\n1. Fix the common issue, countries, event date and entity/person context. Ask\n   only for missing facts that could change applicability. Confirm `list_scopes`.\n2. Research each requested jurisdiction independently in its legal language.\n   Use `search` with explicit scopes, then read the relevant complete articles.\n   Preserve each source's jurisdiction, article, version and official URL.\n3. Check status and temporal support. German snapshots are not historical\n   validity evidence; EU past-date article text is unavailable. Do not blend\n   dates or silently substitute current law for an event date.\n4. For a common EU directive, `eu_transposition` gives reported measures only.\n   Open the relevant national provisions before comparing operative obligations.\n5. Return a table: issue, jurisdiction, retrieved rule, qualifications/exceptions,\n   source and version. Explain practical differences after the table and identify\n   unresolved questions. Do not compare similarity scores or infer equivalence\n   merely because two provisions share a title.\n\nNever turn an unsupported country, empty search or missing exception into a\nstatement that no obligation exists. The output is comparative research, not a\nconclusion on which law governs the user's transaction.\n"
}