cross-team-coordination

slug	cross-team-coordination
name	Cross-Team Coordination
description	Sequence handoffs when legal work spans multiple teams.
version	0.1.0
metadata	{"sources":[{"mode":"port-original","author":"ClaudeCoder","added_in":"0.1.0"}]}

Cross-Team Coordination

Port-original skill. Hand-authored for Legal & Contracts. Owned by the CEO role.

When to fire

After intake-triage flagged the request as cross-team (2+ agents from different teams). The CEO uses this to plan and sequence handoffs so specialists don't block each other or duplicate work.

Inputs

• The triage decision from intake-triage (primary agent, secondary agents, deadline, priority, attorney owner).
• The work request itself.
• Any prior matter file or clause-library entries that are relevant.

Outputs

A coordination plan recorded on the work item:

sequence:
  - step: 1
    agent: <agent-slug>
    skill: <skill>
    inputs: <what they need to start>
    outputs: <what they produce, by when>
  - step: 2
    agent: <agent-slug>
    ...
checkpoints:
  - after_step: 1
    review: <what the CEO checks before unblocking step 2>
final_handoff: <agent that owns the deliverable>
attorney_signoff: <who signs the package before it leaves the firm>

How to plan a multi-team workflow

1. Identify the deliverable. Who owns the output that goes to the requester? That agent runs last.
2. Walk back the dependency chain. Each upstream input becomes a step earlier in the sequence, owned by whichever agent produces it.
3. Identify shared dependencies (the same clause-library lookup feeds both a draft and a redline — run it once, fan out).
4. Set checkpoints at every team boundary. The CEO reviews artifacts before unblocking the next step. This catches "this is not what I meant" before it propagates.
5. Identify the attorney sign-off step. Every package gets attorney review at the end; if the workflow requires interim attorney review (e.g., novel clause), call that out explicitly.
6. Allocate buffer for the deadline. Cross-team legal work always takes longer than serial estimates suggest, especially when the playbook needs updating mid-cycle.

Common coordination patterns

Workflow	Sequence
New financing round	board-consent-drafter (board approval) → cap-table-maintainer (new cap table) → contract-drafter (investor NDA / side-letter) → case-summarizer (any new state-specific rule) → attorney sign-off
New client engagement	intake-letter-drafter (engagement letter) → case-summarizer (conflict check note) → contract-drafter (first NDA) → attorney sign-off
Vendor agreement with redline	contract-drafter (firm's initial draft) → redline-reviewer (review of counterparty markup) → clause-library-curator (capture novel clauses) → attorney sign-off
New product launch	contract-drafter (terms of service / DPA) → case-summarizer (jurisdictional rules) → board-consent-drafter (if material) → attorney sign-off
Equity grant batch	board-consent-drafter (approval consent) → cap-table-maintainer (record grants) → contract-drafter (grant notices / option agreements) → attorney sign-off

Boundaries

• The CEO does not write the artifacts — only sequences them.

• If a checkpoint reveals a problem (wrong jurisdiction, missing data, off-playbook output, hidden conflict of interest), invoke escalation-routing rather than papering over it.

• The attorney sign-off step is never skipped, never deferred, never delegated to another agent. If the attorney owner is unavailable, the work waits.

• If the workflow doesn't match a known pattern, plan it explicitly. Improvising at runtime is how clauses get dropped.

• UPL line. This skill is designed against the unauthorized-practice-of-law line. Output may not be delivered to a recipient, and the agent may not be held out to anyone, until a licensed attorney admitted in the recipient's jurisdiction has reviewed and signed off. The agent does not hold itself out as a lawyer, does not form an attorney–client relationship, and refuses requests that would cross that line. UPL is determined by the recipient's jurisdiction, not the operator's — when in doubt, route to escalation-routing.