After reviewing a contract, plan exactly what to push back on. I sort the issues into must-haves, nice-to-haves, and not-worth-fighting, write the exact wording you can paste into your counter-email, and add a fallback if the other side says no. You need to have reviewed the contract first.
Scanned 9/19/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add gethouston/houston --skill plan-contract-pushback --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Plan Contract Pushback?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/gethouston-plan-contract-pushback)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: plan-contract-pushback
description: "After reviewing a contract, plan exactly what to push back on. I sort the issues into must-haves, nice-to-haves, and not-worth-fighting, write the exact wording you can paste into your counter-email, and add a fallback if the other side says no. You need to have reviewed the contract first."
version: 1
category: Contracts
featured: no
image: scroll
x_houston:
created_by: houston
skill_schema: 1
---
# Plan Contract Pushback
## When to use
- "Draft redline strategy for {counterparty} contract" / "what push back on?" / "prioritize redlines - limited leverage".
- After `review-a-contract` (mode=full) surfaces Yellow + Red clauses, founder needs negotiation sequence.
Run once per contract version after review. Counterparty counters → run again on new version.
## Steps
<!-- houston-workflow:v1 -->
1. **Read shared context.** Load `legal-context.md` for founder risk posture + escalation rules. Load `config/posture.json` for clause-level walk-away positions.
2. **Read upstream review.** Find matching `contract-reviews/{counterparty-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md`. Missing → stop and ask the user in plain language: "I haven't reviewed this contract yet. Want me to do that first?" Don't proceed until that's done. Pull full clause table (Green / Yellow / Red + current text + market standard).
3. **Ask founder two things if unknown.** Both in one message, not two turns:
- **Goal for deal** - close fast / protect IP / limit liability / walk-away leverage / keep optionality for later rounds?
- **Counterparty leverage** - who whale? Customer needed this quarter, or 3 other pipeline deals at similar ACV? Honest read.
4. **Sort every Yellow + Red clause into three tiers:**
- **Must-have redlines** - won't sign without. Week-0 founder defaults: uncapped liability cap replaced with cap anchored to fees; IP assignment of core product struck; one-way indemnity against us made mutual; AI-training carve-out training on our data struck; non-compete on us struck. Adjust based on founder posture + leverage.
- **Nice-to-have redlines** - push if leverage, punt if not. Examples: termination for convenience 30-day notice instead of 60, wider breach-notification SLA, broader exit / data-retrieval rights.
- **Can-punt** - Yellows marked "keep as-is, livable". One-line reason per item so founder knows why not pushing.
5. **Write exact redline language for every must-have.** Not "ask for liability cap" - actual replacement text. Example:
> **Clause 8.2 (Liability Cap).** Replace
> "EACH PARTY'S LIABILITY SHALL BE UNLIMITED" with
> "EACH PARTY'S AGGREGATE LIABILITY SHALL NOT EXCEED FEES PAID OR
> PAYABLE IN THE TWELVE (12) MONTHS PRECEDING THE CLAIM." Market
> standard for SaaS deals at our ACV band; uncapped liability is
> a walk-away.
One-line rationale per must-have founder can paste verbatim into counter-email.
6. **For each must-have, include fallback ladder.** Won't accept must-have → next acceptable step down? Order best-for-us to last-acceptable. Example for liability cap: `1x annual fees` → `12mo fees` → `2x annual fees` → `2x annual fees but only for IP / breach carve-outs`.
7. **Write ask / offer framing.** Concrete sentences founder pastes into response email:
- "We can sign this week if we can land the three items below; everything else is acceptable."
- List 3 must-haves inline (redline + rationale).
- "The remaining {N} points we flagged in our review are acceptable as written."
8. **Flag `attorneyReviewRequired: true`** if:
- Any must-have requires IP, securities, or privacy language without market standard citation.
- Counterparty already refused must-have in prior round (founder considering accepting).
- Deal > $100K ACV.
- Any clause in review marked `UNKNOWN`.
9. **Draft plan (markdown, ~500-800 words).** Structure:
1. **Header** - counterparty, contract type, review date, goal, leverage read.
2. **Must-have redlines** - numbered list. Each item: current text (quoted), replacement text (verbatim), rationale (one sentence), fallback ladder.
3. **Nice-to-have redlines** - numbered list. Each item: current text, target, one-line rationale, push or punt given leverage read.
4. **Can-punt** - bulleted. One-line reason per item.
5. **Ask / offer framing** - paste-ready paragraph.
6. **Attorney review flag** - yes / no + reason if yes.
7. **Next move** - "send this to counterparty", "escalate", or "hold pending {specific info needed}".
10. **Write atomically** to `redline-plans/{counterparty-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md` - `{path}.tmp` then rename.
11. **Append to `outputs.json`.** Read-merge-write atomically:
```json
{
"id": "<uuid v4>",
"type": "redline-plan",
"title": "Redline plan - <counterparty>",
"summary": "<2-3 sentences - must-have count + the top one + framing>",
"path": "redline-plans/<slug>-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md",
"status": "draft",
"attorneyReviewRequired": <true | false>,
"createdAt": "<ISO-8601>",
"updatedAt": "<ISO-8601>"
}
```
12. **Summarize to user.** One short paragraph in plain language: how many must-haves, the most important one, the offer line they can paste, and the next move. Never name files or paths.
## Outputs
- `redline-plans/{counterparty-slug}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md`
- Appends to `outputs.json` with `type: "redline-plan"`.Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!