Negotiation Prep

Negotiation Prep

Prepare a negotiation strategy for "$ARGUMENTS". Define ideal positions, acceptable compromises, and walk-away points for each contentious clause, with counter-arguments and redline suggestions.

Note: AI-generated legal content does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney.

Prerequisites

Check that .metapowers/legal/$ARGUMENTS/00-assess.md exists. If it does not exist, stop and tell the user:

"Run an Assess skill first (e.g. /legal:risk-assessment $ARGUMENTS) to generate the prerequisite assessment artifact."

If the user passes --skip-checks, bypass this check and log the skip to .metapowers/legal/$ARGUMENTS/skip-log.md with a timestamp and the reason "Prerequisite check skipped for negotiation-prep".

Process

1. Read inputs:

   • Read .metapowers/legal/$ARGUMENTS/00-assess.md for risk and jurisdiction context
   • Read .metapowers/legal/$ARGUMENTS/02-review.md if it exists (contract review or red-flag analysis)
   • Read any additional context provided by the user (business priorities, relationship dynamics)

2. Identify contentious clauses:

   • Extract highest-risk items from prior review or red-flag analysis
   • If no prior review exists, identify contentious clauses from the contract directly
   • Rank by business impact and legal risk

3. For each contentious clause, define three positions:

   • Ideal position — the best outcome; what you would propose in opening negotiation
   • Acceptable compromise — a middle ground that adequately protects interests
   • Walk-away point — the minimum acceptable terms; below this, decline or escalate

4. Prepare counter-arguments for anticipated pushback:

   • Identify likely counterparty objections to each ideal position
   • Draft responses grounded in market standards, legal precedent, or business logic
   • Prepare supporting evidence (industry benchmarks, comparable deals)

5. Draft redline suggestions:

   • For each contentious clause, provide specific alternative language
   • Mark additions and deletions clearly
   • Explain the rationale for each proposed change

6. Identify trade-offs:

   • Map concession pairs (concede X to win Y)
   • Identify low-cost concessions that have high perceived value to counterparty
   • Flag non-negotiable items that cannot be traded

7. Define overall negotiation priorities:

   • Must-have — terms that are non-negotiable; deal-breakers if not included
   • Nice-to-have — preferred terms that can be conceded if needed
   • Tradeable — terms available for concession in exchange for must-haves

8. Prepare BATNA (Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement):

   • Define what happens if negotiation fails
   • Assess strength of BATNA relative to proposed deal
   • Identify whether BATNA strengthens or weakens negotiating position

9. Write the artifact to .metapowers/legal/$ARGUMENTS/02-review.md with frontmatter:

   ---
   description: Negotiation prep for $ARGUMENTS
   ---
   

   Include sections:

   • Contentious Clauses — ranked list of clauses requiring negotiation
   • Position Matrix — ideal / compromise / walk-away for each clause
   • Counter-Arguments — anticipated objections and prepared responses
   • Redline Suggestions — specific alternative language per clause
   • Trade-off Map — concession pairs and non-negotiable items
   • Negotiation Priorities — must-have / nice-to-have / tradeable classification
   • BATNA Analysis — alternatives and their impact on negotiating leverage

Output

The negotiation strategy written to .metapowers/legal/$ARGUMENTS/02-review.md. Present a summary to the user highlighting:

• Number of contentious clauses identified and their ranking
• Must-have items that are non-negotiable
• Key trade-offs available (concede X to win Y)
• BATNA strength assessment