---

name: import-tabular-review-lawvable
description: Use when migrating a Lawvable tabular-review skill into the mini-claude-for-legal format. The adapter maps Lawvable's structured table-based legal review output — clause-by-clause issue tables, risk-column scoring, and side-by-side comparison formats — into the standard skill model. Triggers on import of any Lawvable-native tabular review or comparative analysis workflow.
license: MIT
metadata:
id: import.tabular-review-lawvable
category: import
jurisdictions: [multi]
priority: P3
intent: [import, tabular-review, lawvable, migration, contract-review, structured-output]
related: [import-contract-review-anthropic, import-legal-risk-assessment-anthropic, import-nda-triage-anthropic, import-skill-optimizer-lawvable]
source: Louis — HAQQ Legal AI (github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal)
version: "1.0"

Import: Tabular Review (Lawvable)

What it does

This import adapter migrates a Lawvable tabular-review skill into the mini-claude-for-legal standard format. Lawvable's tabular-review output format is a structured table-based presentation of legal review findings: each clause or provision is a row, with columns for issue description, risk level, page/section reference, and recommended action. This format is highly popular with in-house legal teams and deal teams because it enables rapid prioritisation without reading a narrative memo.

The adapter maps this output format into the mini-claude-for-legal skill model so that any Claude-powered legal review can produce Lawvable-compatible tabular output.

Import config

Field	Source mapping	Default if absent
review_type	Legacy type	contract_review
table_columns	Legacy columns array	Standard 6-column set (see below)
risk_levels	Legacy risk_scale	HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / OK
action_column	Legacy include_action boolean	true
section_reference	Legacy include_section boolean	true
summary_row	Legacy include_summary boolean	true
comparison_mode	Legacy compare boolean	false (single-document default)
output_format	Legacy format	markdown_table

Dry-run preview

IMPORT PREVIEW — tabular-review-lawvable
Source shape    : Lawvable tabular review config
Review type     : contract_review
Columns         : 6 (section, clause summary, issue, risk, recommendation, action owner)
Risk levels     : HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / OK
Action column   : enabled
Summary row     : enabled
Comparison mode : disabled (single document)
Output          : markdown_table

Standard 6-column table format

| Section | Clause Summary | Issue | Risk | Recommendation | Action Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clause 1 | [brief summary] | [issue description] | HIGH | [specific fix] | Legal team |
| Clause 2 | [brief summary] | No issue | OK | — | — |
...
| **SUMMARY** | | [count] issues | [overall risk] | [top priority action] | |

Column definitions

Column	Content	Notes
Section	Clause number or section heading	Enables cross-reference to source document
Clause Summary	1-sentence summary of what the clause says	Allows non-lawyers to follow without reading source
Issue	Description of the problem or risk	Specific, factual — not generic ("unfavourable")
Risk	HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW / OK	Based on severity × likelihood; OK = no issue
Recommendation	Specific remediation: suggested re-wording, deletion, or addition	Actionable — not "consider revising"
Action Owner	Who should action: Legal team / Client / Counterparty / Shared	Enables task assignment

Comparison mode (side-by-side)

When comparison_mode: true, the table adds two additional columns for comparing two versions of the same document (e.g. sent draft vs returned redline):

| Section | Issue | Risk (v1) | Version 1 | Risk (v2) | Version 2 | Change Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clause 3 | Liability cap | HIGH |  cap | MEDIUM |  cap | Cap increased — acceptable |

Use cases:

• Comparing own draft vs counterparty redline
• Comparing NDA received vs firm standard
• Comparing regulatory submission v1 vs regulator's marked-up return

MENA output considerations

• Arabic text in table cells: ensure markdown table renderer supports Arabic RTL in cells; add a note if the document is Arabic-primary.
• Bilingual clauses: if a contract has Arabic and English columns, add a "Prevailing language" column.
• Shariah compliance row: for KSA/UAE financial contracts, add a dedicated "Shariah compliance" row in the table.
• Government contracts: UAE and KSA government contracts may have non-negotiable clauses; mark these as OK (non-negotiable) rather than LOW to avoid wasted review effort.

Quality rules for tabular output

• Every HIGH-risk row must have a specific, concrete Recommendation — never "review and revise"
• Issue column must be factual and specific — never "this clause is unfavourable"
• No more than 20 rows without a section break; add headers for major contract parts (Preamble, Commercial Terms, Liability, Governing Law, etc.)
• Summary row must aggregate: total issues, distribution by risk level, top-3 priority actions

Failure modes

Error	Likely cause	Resolution
generic_issues	Legacy used "unfavourable" as issue description	Re-run with factual issue-description prompt
no_action_owner	Legacy omitted action column	Add default Legal team owner for all HIGH issues
table_overflow	>30 rows without structure	Add section headers; split into multiple tables by contract part
comparison_columns_missing	Comparison mode but only 6 columns	Add v1/v2 columns automatically when two documents provided

Related skills

• [[import-contract-review-anthropic]]
• [[import-legal-risk-assessment-anthropic]]
• [[import-nda-triage-anthropic]]
• [[import-skill-optimizer-lawvable]]
• [[review-contract-generic]]