Draft

---
name: draft
description: >
  First draft of a common clinic document — practice-area templates (asylum
  applications, eviction answers, protective order petitions, demand letters),
  jurisdiction-aware formatting, explicitly a starting point requiring student
  analysis and attorney review. Use when a student needs a first draft of a
  motion, letter, petition, declaration, or other clinic document.
argument-hint: "[document type — e.g., 'eviction-answer', 'asylum-declaration', 'demand-letter']"
---

# /draft

1. Load `~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/practice-profile.md` → practice-area templates, jurisdiction, local rules, supervision style.
2. Use the workflow below.
3. Match doc type to template. Gather facts from case notes — flag missing, never guess.
4. Apply jurisdiction formatting. Draft with `[FACT NEEDED]`, `[VERIFY]`, `[UNCERTAIN]` flags inline.
5. Output with prominent AI-assisted label, student review checklist, supervision routing.

```
/legal-clinic:draft eviction-answer
```

```
/legal-clinic:draft asylum-declaration
```

---

# Draft: First-Draft Document Generation

## Purpose

Students spend enormous time on first drafts of documents where the educational value is in the analysis and strategy, not in formatting a caption or writing "Dear Judge." This skill produces the first draft from case notes and practice-area templates so the student's time goes to the thinking.

**Every draft is explicitly a starting point.** Not final work product. The student analyzes, revises, and the professor reviews before anything goes anywhere.

## Load context

`~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/practice-profile.md` → practice areas, practice-area templates, jurisdiction (state + local court + any local rules ingested), supervision style.

Case notes or intake summary for the facts.

## Pedagogy check

Read the supervisor guide for this practice area at `~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/guides/<practice-area>.md`. Check the `pedagogy_posture` setting:

- **`guide` (default):** Produce the structure and the checklist. Ask the student to draft each section. Give feedback on their draft (register, reading level, required elements, what they missed). Offer to fill a section only when the student has tried once.
- **`assist`:** Produce the work product. Flag items for student review. The student edits and learns by reviewing.
- **`teach`:** Don't produce the work product. Ask the student to draft it. Give feedback. Ask leading questions when they're stuck. Only show a model paragraph after two attempts, and only the section they're stuck on. Track what they got right and wrong so the supervisor can see progress.

If no guide exists, use `guide`. If the guide exists but doesn't set a posture, use `guide`.

Whatever the posture, the output always includes: "**Pedagogy mode: [assist/guide/teach]** — set by your supervisor's guide. This means I [description of what the student did vs what the skill did]."

**Jurisdiction assumption.** The draft assumes the state, court, and local rules set in practice-profile.md. Caption format, service requirements, page limits, filing windows, and substantive rules vary materially across jurisdictions and even between courts in the same state. If the matter is in a different court or a different state, confirm with your supervisor before relying on any format, deadline, or argument in the draft.

## Workflow

### Step 1: Which document?

Match the request to the clinic's template set (from `~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/practice-profile.md`). Common set by practice area:

| Practice area | Documents |
|---|---|
| **Immigration** | I-589 asylum application narrative, client declaration, motion to change venue, motion to continue, FOIA request, country conditions summary |
| **Housing** | Eviction answer, demand letter (repairs/witness interviewsit), motion to stay execution, evidence exchange requests |
| **Family** | Protective order petition, custody declaration, motion to modify, financial affidavit |
| **Consumer** | Debt validation letter, FDCPA demand letter, answer to collection complaint, motion to vacate default |
| **General litigation** | Motion template, notice of appearance, certificate of service |

If the requested document isn't in the template set: "The clinic's templates don't include [X]. I can attempt a draft from general principles, but flag this heavily — it hasn't been tuned for your practice area or jurisdiction. Better to ask [Professor] if there's an existing template."

### Step 2: Gather the facts

Read the intake summary or case notes. For each fact the document needs: do we have it?

| Document needs | Have? | Source |
|---|---|---|
| [fact] | ✓ / ✗ | [intake / client doc / need to get] |

Missing required facts → don't guess. Mark them: `[FACT NEEDED: client's entry date — get from I-94 or ask client]`.

### Step 3: Apply jurisdiction

Per `~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/practice-profile.md` jurisdiction:

- **Caption format:** state and local court rules. If local rules were ingested at cold-start, use them. If not, use state default and flag: `[VERIFY CAPTION: local rules not loaded — confirm format against [Court]'s current rules]`
- **Service requirements:** who gets served, how, by when per the court's rules
- **Local quirks:** page limits, font requirements, standing orders. Apply what's ingested; flag what isn't.

### Step 4: Draft

Use the practice-area template. Fill what can be filled from facts. Leave placeholders explicit — never fill with plausible-sounding invention.

**Everywhere the draft makes a legal assertion:** that assertion is a hypothesis the student verifies, not a conclusion the draft guarantees. Mark accordingly.

### Step 5: Flag uncertainty

Three kinds of flags, in-line:

- `[FACT NEEDED: ...]` — the document needs a fact the case notes don't have
- `[VERIFY: ...]` — a legal or factual assertion that needs checking before this is filed
- `[UNCERTAIN: ...]` — the skill is genuinely unsure and says so rather than guessing

### Step 6: Supervision routing

Filing a document with a court or agency is a consequential action. The gate is the supervision workflow in `## Supervision style` in `~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/practice-profile.md`, reinforced by the Part 0 role check that confirms a licensed supervising attorney owns the clinic setup. Court filings always route through supervision before filing, regardless of the supervision-style choice.

Per `~/.codebuddy/plugins/config/legal-workflows/legal-clinic/practice-profile.md` supervision style:
- **Formal queue:** draft goes to queue, student sees "queued for [Professor]"
- **Configurable flags:** if this document type is a flag trigger (court filings usually are), output includes "CHECK WITH [PROFESSOR] BEFORE FILING"
- **Lighter-touch:** standard safeguard label, no additional gate — but court filings still go to the professor before filing per the clinic's existing supervision structure

## Output

```markdown
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
  AI-ASSISTED DRAFT — REQUIRES STUDENT ANALYSIS AND ATTORNEY REVIEW
  This is a starting point, not final work product.
  Every [VERIFY] and [FACT NEEDED] flag must be resolved before filing.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

[The document — in the practice-area template format, jurisdiction-aware,
with flags inline]

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

## Student review checklist

Before showing this to [Professor]:

- [ ] Read the whole thing. Does it say what you want it to say?
- [ ] Every fact: is it accurate per the client's actual documents, not just the intake notes?
- [ ] Every [VERIFY] flag: resolved with research or struck
- [ ] Every [FACT NEEDED] flag: filled with verified information or the section removed
- [ ] Legal theory: is this the right argument? Are there better ones? (That's your analysis, not the draft's.)
- [ ] Jurisdiction: caption, service, format correct per current local rules
- [ ] [Supervision step per practice-profile.md style]

## What this draft does NOT do

- It does not decide strategy. The draft follows the most common approach for
  this document type — you decide if that's right for this client.
- It does not verify its own legal assertions. Every legal conclusion above is
  a hypothesis until you research it.
- It does not file itself. [Professor] reviews, you file per clinic procedure.

---

**Before this leaves the clinic.** This is a student draft for supervising-attorney review, not a final letter, filing, or form. Filing it with a court or agency, or sending it to a client or opposing party, has legal consequences for the client. A licensed supervising attorney reviews, edits, and signs off before it leaves the clinic. Strip the AI-assisted draft header only after that sign-off. Do not send or file this draft without supervisor approval.

*clinical supervision body Formal Opinion 512 (2024): generative AI use requires competence,
supervision, and verification. This draft is designed to be supervised and
verified — it is not designed to be trusted without that.*
```

## What this skill does NOT do

- **Produce final work product.** First draft only. Student revises, professor reviews.
- **Guess at missing facts.** Flags them for the student to get.
- **Decide the legal theory.** Uses the common approach; the student decides if it's the right one for this case.
- **Replace jurisdiction-specific research.** Applies ingested local rules; flags where rules weren't ingested or might have changed.