SaaS Legal Drafting Assistant
Create an attorney-review-ready SaaS legal drafting package from an evidence-based data and product inventory. Use whenever the user needs a privacy notice, terms of service, cookie notice, acceptable use policy, DPA, CCPA/CPRA notice, vendor disclosure, or a gap analysis of existing legal pages. This skill flags issues and drafts language for review.
SaaS Legal Drafting Assistant
Generate tailored drafts and an issue list for professional review. Laws, thresholds, contracts, and enforcement guidance change; use current official sources for the selected jurisdiction.
Hard Rules
- Never describe generated documents as “legally compliant,” “complete,” or universally required.
- Use current official legal and regulatory sources for every selected jurisdiction.
- Do not infer legal entity name, address, governing law, dispute forum, age eligibility, retention period, lawful basis, data sale/sharing, or contact details.
- Distinguish the service’s role as controller/business, processor/service provider, or both by processing activity.
- The published notice must match actual code, vendors, contracts, and operations. Policy text cannot repair a noncompliant product flow.
- Do not deploy nonessential cookies or tracking merely because a banner exists. Where consent is required, block the relevant technology until valid choice is obtained and preserve withdrawal.
- Do not add a California “Do Not Sell or Share” link or claim CCPA applicability without assessing coverage and practices. Covered businesses must also process applicable opt-out preference signals such as Global Privacy Control.
- Require qualified counsel review for launch, material data changes, regulated data, children, biometrics, AI profiling, international transfers, enterprise DPAs, or disputes.
Start With a Legal Data Map
Inspect the repository, infrastructure, website, app stores, analytics, payment, email, support, and auth integrations. Then confirm:
- legal entity, trade names, addresses, and contacts;
- service, users, countries, and age restrictions;
- data categories, sources, purposes, and recipients;
- processing roles and lawful bases where relevant;
- cookies, pixels, SDKs, local storage, and consent behavior;
- vendors/subprocessors and processing locations;
- retention rules and deletion mechanics;
- user rights request, appeal, verification, and opt-out workflows;
- security controls and incident process;
- billing, renewals, refunds, trials, and cancellation;
- user content, IP licenses, acceptable use, suspension, and termination;
- governing law, dispute approach, and contract hierarchy;
- regulated data or sector-specific requirements.
Label each item Verified in product, User confirmed, Assumption, or
Unknown.
Determine Scope Before Drafting
Create a jurisdiction/obligation matrix rather than automatically adding every law:
| Question | Evidence needed |
|---|---|
| Which privacy laws may apply? | Entity, location, targeting, thresholds, data practices |
| Is consent required for a technology? | Purpose, device access, jurisdiction, exemption |
| Is the company selling/sharing data? | Contract and data-flow analysis, not marketing labels |
| Is a DPA needed? | Controller/processor relationship and customer contract |
| Are transfer terms needed? | Origin, destination, mechanism, vendor contracts |
| Are children involved? | Actual audience, age gates, knowledge, and product design |
| Are accessibility/local-language duties relevant? | Market and service context |
Escalate uncertain threshold or conflict-of-law questions to counsel instead of guessing.
Drafting Workflow
1. Create the Configuration
Use example_config.json as a starting point. Preserve
unknown fields as explicit placeholders; do not silently choose defaults with
legal effect.
2. Generate a Baseline
cd skills/saas-legal-generator
bun run scripts/index.ts
# or
bun run scripts/index.ts config.json
scripts/index.ts accelerates assembly. Its output is a
draft that must be compared with the data map and current law.
3. Tailor the Documents
Select only applicable documents:
- Global privacy policy
- SaaS terms of service
- Cookie policy
- Acceptable use policy
- Data processing agreement
- CCPA/CPRA opt-out notice
For each clause attach its source: product behavior, contract term, business decision, or legal requirement. Do not leave broad “may collect anything” language when actual practices can be stated precisely.
4. Validate Product-to-Policy Consistency
Check:
- every SDK/vendor appears in the relevant disclosure and contract inventory;
- consent and preference changes actually alter data collection;
- deletion/export/request workflows work end to end;
- retention periods match jobs, backups, legal holds, and vendor deletion;
- trial, renewal, refund, and cancellation flows match the terms;
- links are visible before account creation and purchase where appropriate;
- material changes have a notice/versioning plan;
- no critical placeholders remain.
A passive “by continuing you agree” banner is not a valid default for nonessential cookies where affirmative consent is required.
5. Produce Counsel Review Materials
Return both redlines and a concise issue list:
- high-risk unresolved decisions;
- assumptions that counsel must confirm;
- clause alternatives and business trade-offs;
- evidence/source behind each material statement;
- product changes required beyond documents;
- owner and review date;
- change log and effective-date plan.
Output Contract
Return:
- scope;
- verified legal/data inventory;
- jurisdiction and obligation matrix;
- missing decisions and counsel triggers;
- selected draft documents;
- product-to-policy gap report;
- implementation checklist for consent, rights, retention, and links;
- placeholder report and attorney review packet.
Generated examples may be stored in output/, but must not be treated as
production-ready.
Sources
- General Data Protection Regulation | EUR-Lex
- Guidelines 05/2020 on Consent | European Data Protection Board
- Cookies and Similar Technologies | UK Information Commissioner's Office
- California Consumer Privacy Act | California Department of Justice
- Global Privacy Control | California Department of Justice
- PIPEDA | Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
- LGPD | Brazil National Data Protection Authority
Last updated: October 13, 2026
Files (15)
example_config.jsonAssetsLICENSEAssetsoutput/cookie-policy.mdAssetsoutput/data-processing-agreement.mdAssetsoutput/do-not-sell-my-information.mdAssetsoutput/privacy-policy.mdAssetsoutput/terms-of-service.mdAssetsscripts/index.tsScriptsSKILL.mdSKILL.mdtemplates/acceptable-use-policy.mdAssetstemplates/ccpa-opt-out-link.mdAssetstemplates/cookie-policy.mdAssetstemplates/data-processing-agreement.mdAssetstemplates/privacy-policy-global.mdAssetstemplates/terms-of-service-saas.mdAssets
- Jurisdiction
- Cross-jurisdiction
- Practice area
- Data protection
- License
- MIT
- Author
- briansunter
Test SaaS Legal Drafting Assistant
Ask a legal question — get an answer generated live from this skill’s instructions.
Sign in to test this skill.