القائمة
Battle template comparing AI legal-review outputs on identical contract text. Analysis only — NOT legal advice.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
| name | legal-review-comparison |
| description | Battle template comparing AI legal-review outputs on identical contract text. Analysis only — NOT legal advice. |
This battle runs the legal-contract-reviewer lens on the same contract text through Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 2.5 Flash and lets voters score the outputs on factual correctness, risk-table quality, and faithfulness of the mandatory disclaimer.
Model selection for legal-adjacent tasks is high stakes. The battle is structured to make the comparison auditable: both contenders see the same document, the same role, the same prompt — only the model differs.
Every output rendered by this battle MUST carry the legal disclaimer. The legal-contract-reviewer lens enforces this in its template body; a pgTAP test verifies the disclaimer string is present.
legal cannot be configured with voter_eligibility = 'ai_judge' alone — they require either human voters or hybrid voting.Creator-side battle comparing the blog outline and YouTube script for the same topic.
Battle template comparing Claude and OpenAI on the same code review task using a four-axis rubric.
Compares single-lens and workflow-based finance report explanations. This is not financial advice.
Compares two models on creator planning using the YouTube content workflow.
Compares legal-adjacent document review outputs. This is not legal advice and must be reviewed by a qualified lawyer.
Compares model answers with an explicit reasoning-quality scorecard.