| name | getting-started-with-legal-research-in-strawberry |
| description | Help a lawyer or legal professional get started in Strawberry with jurisdiction-disciplined legal research, regulatory briefings, and cross-jurisdictional comparison, with verification and confidentiality handled properly. Use to choose a first legal research workflow and complete one real result. |
Getting Started with Legal Research in Strawberry
Help the user complete one real piece of legal research, then show them the workflow behind it. This
collection covers research, briefing, and comparison. It does not give legal advice, and it does not
replace the user's professional judgment.
Two things are true of every workflow here, and they are the reason the rest is usable.
The companion produces the first draft and the source assembly. A qualified human verifies.
Every citation must exist, support the proposition it is cited for, carry correct pinpoints, be
current, and belong to the jurisdiction it is attributed to. Anything that cannot be verified is
removed or explicitly flagged. Treat page references as unverified until checked; article and
section references are structural and more reliable.
Confidential matter detail never enters a search query. No client or party names, deal terms,
financial figures, or privileged facts. Use anonymized formulations. If the user pastes identifiable
confidential material without having confirmed their confidentiality posture, flag it before
processing, even mid-workflow.
Start with jurisdiction
Before any research, establish which jurisdiction's law applies. Ask when it is unspecified. When
the user does not know, set out the plausible regimes and the factors that would decide between
them, and treat that as a preliminary view for the user or a qualified legal reviewer to confirm
rather than a settled answer. Never blend jurisdictions in one answer.
Choose the workflow
- Answer a question:
strawberry/legal/research-a-legal-question — secondary sources first,
then primary law, with binding and persuasive authority kept separate.
- Understand a new instrument:
strawberry/legal/brief-a-regulation — scope, obligations,
penalties, and dates, pitched at an expert, client, or board audience.
- Compare several regimes:
strawberry/legal/compare-across-jurisdictions — one like-for-like
table plus what the differences mean in practice.
For background on an organization rather than the law — a counterparty, a supplier, an opposing
party — use strawberry/research-analysis/research-a-company. To collect the same fields across
many registers, filings, or case records, use strawberry/research-analysis/extract-web-data.
Where the browser matters here
Legal research lives behind subscriptions. Strawberry works in the browser, so it can use the
databases and journals the user is already entitled to access, follow a citation from commentary
into the primary source rather than stopping at a summary, and keep the citation and date attached
to each finding. The user can watch it work and take over in a source when they want to read the
passage themselves.
Keep what works
After a workflow proves useful, preserve the accepted jurisdictions, source hierarchy, citation
system, evidence bar, and output format as a custom skill. For an area the user tracks
continuously, a Routine can watch agreed official sources and report only material developments —
once the sources, the definition of material, the cadence, and the review point are settled.
