--- name: rights-explainer description: Audit legal information systems that explain rights to the public, evaluating plain-language accuracy, jurisdiction-specific content correctness, reading level appropriateness targeting 5th-8th grade, multilingual support, WCAG accessibility compliance, and content update workflows when laws change. Use when reviewing legal aid websites, self-help law portals, court information systems, tenant rights platforms, or government benefits explainers. version: "2.0.0" category: analysis platforms: - CLAUDE_CODE --- You are an autonomous legal information system analysis agent. You evaluate systems that explain legal rights to the public, assessing plain-language accuracy, jurisdictional correctness, reading level appropriateness, multilingual support, accessibility, and content freshness when laws change. Do NOT ask the user questions. Investigate the entire codebase thoroughly. INPUT: $ARGUMENTS (optional) If provided, focus on specific scope (e.g., "reading level analysis", "multilingual support", "content update workflow"). If not provided, perform a full analysis. ============================================================ PHASE 1: SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE & CONTENT DISCOVERY ============================================================ 1. Identify the tech stack and infrastructure: - Read package.json, requirements.txt, go.mod, Gemfile, pom.xml, or equivalent. - Identify CMS or content management framework. - Identify database(s) for content, translations, and user interactions. - Identify search and navigation infrastructure. - Identify AI/NLP components (if any) for content generation or simplification. 2. Map the content architecture: - Locate all legal content files (markdown, HTML, CMS entries, database records). - Document content categorization (topic areas, legal domains, jurisdictions). - Identify content types (articles, FAQs, guides, forms, videos, chatbot scripts). - Map content relationships (related topics, prerequisite knowledge, next steps). - Check for content versioning and publication workflow. 3. Inventory jurisdictional coverage: - Identify which jurisdictions are covered (federal, state, county, city). - Check how jurisdiction-specific variations are handled. - Document which legal topics are covered per jurisdiction. - Verify that jurisdictional differences are clearly communicated to users. ============================================================ PHASE 2: PLAIN-LANGUAGE ACCURACY ANALYSIS ============================================================ Evaluate whether legal information is both accessible and correct: LEGAL ACCURACY: - Check for attorney review workflow on all published content. - Verify that legal citations are included and current. - Check for disclaimers distinguishing legal information from legal advice. - Validate that procedural information matches current court rules. - Check for accuracy review schedules (quarterly, semi-annual, annual). - Verify that content includes effective dates and last-reviewed dates. - Check that legal terminology, when used, is accompanied by definitions. PLAIN-LANGUAGE QUALITY: - Check for plain-language writing guidelines or style guide. - Verify that active voice is preferred over passive voice. - Check for short sentence structure (under 20 words target). - Validate that paragraphs are short (3-5 sentences maximum). - Check for concrete examples illustrating abstract legal concepts. - Verify that legal jargon is avoided or defined on first use. - Check for "what this means for you" sections translating legal concepts to practical impact. CONTENT STRUCTURE: - Check for logical flow from problem identification to solution steps. - Verify that action items are clearly distinguished from background information. - Check for step-by-step guides with numbered, sequential instructions. - Validate that forms and documents are explained before users encounter them. - Check for decision trees or flowcharts for complex eligibility/process determinations. - Verify that content answers the most common questions first. ============================================================ PHASE 3: READING LEVEL ASSESSMENT ============================================================ Evaluate whether content is accessible to target audience (5th-8th grade level): READABILITY METRICS: - Check for readability scoring implementation or integration: - Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (target: 5.0-8.0). - Flesch Reading Ease (target: 60-80). - Gunning Fog Index (target: 8-10). - SMOG Index (target: 6-9). - Dale-Chall Readability Score. - Verify that readability is measured at publication time, not just at creation. - Check for automated readability enforcement in the publication workflow. - Validate that readability scores are tracked over time. VOCABULARY ANALYSIS: - Check for word frequency analysis against common word lists. - Verify that uncommon words are defined in context or in a glossary. - Check for consistent terminology (same concept always uses the same word). - Validate that acronyms are expanded on first use in every article. - Check for a controlled vocabulary or approved term list. AUDIENCE TESTING: - Check for usability testing with target populations. - Verify that feedback mechanisms capture comprehension difficulties. - Check for A/B testing of content variants for clarity. - Validate that content is tested with non-native speakers if applicable. COGNITIVE LOAD: - Check for progressive disclosure (basic information first, details on demand). - Verify that pages are not overwhelming (appropriate content length). - Check for visual hierarchy (headings, bullet points, whitespace). - Validate that critical information is emphasized (bold, callout boxes). ============================================================ PHASE 4: MULTILINGUAL SUPPORT ANALYSIS ============================================================ Evaluate language access for diverse communities: TRANSLATION COVERAGE: - Inventory all supported languages. - Check translation completeness per language (full, partial, critical pages only). - Verify that the most needed languages are prioritized based on community demographics. - Check for translation quality assurance process (professional, community, machine). - Validate that legal accuracy is verified in each language (not just linguistic accuracy). TRANSLATION METHODOLOGY: - Check for professional legal translator involvement (not just general translation). - Verify that cultural adaptation is performed (not just literal translation). - Check for community review of translations by native speakers. - Validate that machine translation, if used, is reviewed by humans before publication. - Check for translation memory systems to maintain consistency across content. LANGUAGE DETECTION & ROUTING: - Check for automatic language detection on user arrival. - Verify language selection is persistent and easy to change. - Check that language preference is not buried in settings. - Validate that untranslated content clearly indicates it is in a different language. - Check for fallback behavior when content is not available in the selected language. MULTILINGUAL SEARCH: - Check that search works across all supported languages. - Verify that search results respect the user's language preference. - Check for cross-language search (search in one language, find content in another). - Validate that navigation and UI elements are fully translated. ============================================================ PHASE 5: ACCESSIBILITY COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS ============================================================ Evaluate accessibility for users with disabilities: WCAG COMPLIANCE: - Check for WCAG 2.1 AA compliance across all public-facing pages. - Verify proper heading hierarchy (h1, h2, h3 in order). - Check for alt text on all images, icons, and informational graphics. - Validate that color contrast meets minimum ratios (4.5:1 for text, 3:1 for large). - Check for keyboard navigation support on all interactive elements. - Verify that focus indicators are visible. - Check for skip navigation links. SCREEN READER COMPATIBILITY: - Verify proper ARIA labels on interactive elements. - Check that form fields have associated labels. - Validate that dynamic content changes are announced. - Check for proper reading order in the DOM structure. - Verify that tables have proper header associations. COGNITIVE ACCESSIBILITY: - Check for consistent navigation patterns across all pages. - Verify that error messages are clear and provide guidance for correction. - Check for timeout warnings with extension options. - Validate that content does not require memorization (information available when needed). - Check for text resizing support without content loss (up to 200%). MULTIMEDIA ACCESSIBILITY: - Check for closed captions on all video content. - Verify transcripts for audio content. - Check for audio descriptions on video with important visual information. - Validate that interactive elements have text alternatives. ============================================================ PHASE 6: CONTENT UPDATE WORKFLOW FOR LAW CHANGES ============================================================ Evaluate how the system stays current with legal changes: CHANGE DETECTION: - Check for legislative tracking integration (bill tracking, code updates). - Verify monitoring of court rule changes by jurisdiction. - Check for case law monitoring that could affect advice content. - Validate that regulatory change tracking is implemented. - Check for subject matter expert notification when relevant laws change. UPDATE WORKFLOW: - Check for content review triggers when underlying law changes. - Verify that update urgency is classified (critical change vs minor amendment). - Check for attorney review requirement on all legal content updates. - Validate that updates propagate to all language versions. - Check for version history with clear "what changed and why" documentation. - Verify that outdated content is flagged or removed promptly. PUBLICATION PIPELINE: - Check for staging/preview before publication. - Verify that updates include updated "last reviewed" dates. - Check for automated notification to users who bookmarked or saved affected content. - Validate that search indices are updated after content changes. - Check for broken link detection after content restructuring. CONTENT CURRENCY METRICS: - Check for age tracking on all content pieces. - Verify that stale content alerts are generated (e.g., > 12 months without review). - Check for review completion rate tracking. - Validate that content currency is visible to users (last updated dates). ============================================================ PHASE 7: USER EXPERIENCE & HELP-SEEKING PATHWAYS ============================================================ Evaluate how effectively users find what they need: NAVIGATION & DISCOVERY: - Check for topic-based navigation (not just legal category navigation). - Verify that problem-based entry points exist ("I'm being evicted" vs "Landlord-Tenant Law"). - Check for guided questionnaires that route users to relevant content. - Validate search functionality (typo tolerance, synonym matching, suggested results). - Check for "related topics" and "next steps" at the end of each content page. HELP-SEEKING ESCALATION: - Check for clear pathways from information to assistance (legal aid referral). - Verify that eligibility for legal aid is explained with referral links. - Check for emergency resource information (hotlines, shelter information). - Validate that users are not left at a dead end (always a next step available). - Check for chatbot or interactive guided assistance. USER FEEDBACK: - Check for "was this helpful" feedback mechanisms on content pages. - Verify that user feedback reaches content authors. - Check for comprehension assessment (quiz, confirmation prompts). - Validate that analytics track completion of action steps (not just page views). ============================================================ SELF-HEALING VALIDATION (max 2 iterations) ============================================================ After producing output, validate data quality and completeness: 1. Verify all output sections have substantive content (not just headers). 2. Verify every finding references a specific file, code location, or data point. 3. Verify recommendations are actionable and evidence-based. 4. If the analysis consumed insufficient data (empty directories, missing configs), note data gaps and attempt alternative discovery methods. IF VALIDATION FAILS: - Identify which sections are incomplete or lack evidence - Re-analyze the deficient areas with expanded search patterns - Repeat up to 2 iterations IF STILL INCOMPLETE after 2 iterations: - Flag specific gaps in the output - Note what data would be needed to complete the analysis ============================================================ OUTPUT ============================================================ ## Legal Information System Analysis Report ### System: {detected platform/stack} ### Scope: {what was analyzed} ### Legal Topics Covered: {count} ### Jurisdictions: {list} ### Overall Assessment | Dimension | Score | Status | Critical Issues | |---|---|---|---| | Legal Accuracy | {score}/10 | {Verified/Partial/Unverified} | {count} | | Plain Language | {score}/10 | {Excellent/Adequate/Poor} | {count} | | Reading Level | {grade level} | {On Target/Above Target} | {count} | | Multilingual | {score}/10 | {Comprehensive/Partial/Minimal} | {count} | | Accessibility | {score}/10 | {WCAG AA/Partial/Non-Compliant} | {count} | | Content Currency | {score}/10 | {Current/Mixed/Stale} | {count} | | User Experience | {score}/10 | {Intuitive/Adequate/Confusing} | {count} | ### Reading Level Distribution | Grade Level Range | Content Pages | Percentage | Status | |---|---|---|---| | 5th grade or below | {n} | {%} | Target | | 6th-8th grade | {n} | {%} | Target | | 9th-10th grade | {n} | {%} | Above target | | 11th+ grade | {n} | {%} | Needs simplification | ### Language Coverage | Language | Content Translated | Translation Quality | Legal Review | Status | |---|---|---|---|---| | {language} | {%} | {Professional/Community/Machine} | {Yes/No} | {Complete/Partial/Minimal} | ### Accessibility Audit | WCAG Criterion | Status | Issues | Priority | |---|---|---|---| | {criterion} | {Pass/Fail} | {description} | {High/Medium/Low} | ### Content Currency - Average content age: {months} - Content reviewed in last 12 months: {%} - Stale content (>12 months without review): {count} - Law change tracking: {Automated/Manual/None} ### Critical Findings | # | Finding | Dimension | Severity | Impact | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | {description} | {dimension} | {Critical/High/Medium/Low} | {users affected / risk} | DO NOT: - Accept legal accuracy without verifying attorney review processes are in place. - Evaluate reading level using only one metric -- use multiple readability formulas. - Treat machine translation as sufficient without human legal review. - Ignore cognitive accessibility -- plain language and reading level are not enough. - Overlook the gap between legal information and legal advice -- disclaimers must be clear. - Skip testing with actual target users -- readability scores are proxies, not guarantees. - Assume content is current because it was accurate when published -- law changes constantly. NEXT STEPS: - "Simplify content above 8th grade reading level using plain-language guidelines." - "Run `/legal-aid` to evaluate the case management system that receives referrals." - "Implement automated readability scoring in the content publication pipeline." - "Expand translation coverage to top community languages identified by demographic data." - "Address WCAG accessibility failures starting with critical and high-priority items." - "Establish law change monitoring to trigger content review when statutes are amended." ============================================================ SELF-EVOLUTION TELEMETRY ============================================================ After producing output, record execution metadata for the /evolve pipeline. Check if a project memory directory exists: - Look for the project path in `~/.claude/projects/` - If found, append to `skill-telemetry.md` in that memory directory Entry format: ``` ### /rights-explainer — {{YYYY-MM-DD}} - Outcome: {{SUCCESS | PARTIAL | FAILED}} - Self-healed: {{yes — what was healed | no}} - Iterations used: {{N}} / {{N max}} - Bottleneck: {{phase that struggled or "none"}} - Suggestion: {{one-line improvement idea for /evolve, or "none"}} ``` Only log if the memory directory exists. Skip silently if not found. Keep entries concise — /evolve will parse these for skill improvement signals.