Draft Legal Piece

If BLOCKERs exist, refuse to enter writing mode. Explain what's missing and suggest the lawyer use plan-legal-docs to resolve the gaps first. Drafting from incomplete documentation defeats the purpose of the method — it forces the AI to improvise, which is exactly what structured documentation exists to prevent.

If the documentation has only WARNs or INFOs, proceed but note the warnings at the top of the output so the lawyer is aware.

Reading Order

The documentation must be read in a specific sequence because each document builds context for the next. This order matters — skipping or reordering leads to loss of context:

1. docs/CASO.md — Establishes the factual universe: parties, facts, claims, urgency. After reading this, the AI knows what happened and who is involved.

2. docs/ESTRATEGIA.md — Defines how the piece will be structured: type of action, rite, jurisdiction, argument order, risks. This is the architectural blueprint.

3. docs/GLOSSARIO.md — Ensures domain-specific terms are used correctly and consistently.

4. docs/DECISOES.md — Reveals the strategic choices already made and their rationale. The AI must respect these decisions, not second-guess them.

5. docs/materias/INDEX.md — Identifies all matérias and their priority/order.

6. For each matéria, in the order defined by ESTRATEGIA.md:

   • README.md — Theses (TESE-) and sufficiency criteria (CS-)
   • normas.md — Legal foundations: legislation, jurisprudence, doctrine, subsumption tables
   • fluxos.md — Logical chains (premise → norm → subsumption → conclusion)
   • notas.md — Strategic notes, risks, drafting guidance

7. docs/requisitos-formais/REQUISITOS_FORMAIS.md — Formatting constraints, deadlines, filing requirements. Read last because these are applied as a final layer.

Piece Variants

Read the appropriate reference file for the piece type before drafting:

• Petição / Recurso / Defesa (contencioso): references/estrutura-peticao.md
• Contrato: references/estrutura-contrato.md
• Parecer: references/estrutura-parecer.md

The piece type is determined from ESTRATEGIA.md (field "Tipo de Peça") or from the user's request.

Drafting Rules

1. Argue only what is documented

Every argumentative paragraph must trace to at least one TESE-* ID. If a matéria has no teses defined, it must not appear in the piece. The AI must not generate arguments that are not grounded in the documentation — even if they seem relevant. This is the most important rule of the skill. When the AI has ideas for additional arguments, it should note them as suggestions at the end of the output, not weave them into the piece.

2. Cite only catalogued norms

Legal references (legislation, jurisprudence, doctrine) must come from normas.md of the relevant matéria. The AI must not fabricate citations, invent case numbers, or reference statutes not documented. This directly combats legal hallucination — the most dangerous form of AI error in law.

If the AI believes additional legal references would strengthen an argument, it should flag this as a suggestion: "Considerar incluir referência a [tema] em normas.md da matéria [X]."

3. Follow the strategy, not your intuition

The argument order comes from ESTRATEGIA.md. The AI must not reorder arguments based on what it considers a better flow. The lawyer has already made this strategic decision.

4. Respect formal requirements

Formatting (font, spacing, margins, page limits) comes from REQUISITOS_FORMAIS.md. If the piece is being generated as markdown, include a header comment noting the formatting requirements for when the document is converted to its final format.

5. Include traceability markers

After each major section or argumentative block, include an HTML comment with the IDs that support that section:

<!-- Traces: TESE-NEXO-CAUSAL-001 | CS-NEXO-CAUSAL-001 | D003 -->

These markers are invisible in the rendered document but allow the lawyer to navigate from any paragraph back to its documentation source. They also enable the post-draft verification script to check coverage.

6. Mark uncertainty explicitly

If the documentation is ambiguous on a point, or if a CS-* criterion is not fully satisfiable with the available information, mark it inline:

<!-- ATENÇÃO: CS-DANO-MORAL-002 depende de laudo pericial ainda não disponível (ver PENDENCIAS.md) -->

This prevents the AI from silently papering over gaps.

Output Structure

The skill produces two artifacts:

1. The Draft (rascunho-<tipo>.md)

The complete legal piece in markdown, following the structure defined by the piece variant and ESTRATEGIA.md. Includes traceability markers throughout.

2. Coverage Report (relatorio-cobertura.md)

A verification report showing:

• Tese coverage: For each TESE-* in the documentation, whether it appears in the draft.
• Norm coverage: For each entry in normas.md, whether it was cited.
• Formal requirements: For each RF-*, whether it was addressed.
• Uncovered items: Any TESE-* or RF-* that has no corresponding section in the draft.
• Suggestions: Additional arguments or references the AI identified but did not include (per rule 1 and 2).

Save both files to the repository's docs/relatorios/ directory.

Post-Draft Verification

After generating the draft, run the coverage verification:

python3 scripts/verify_coverage.py <repo-path> <draft-path>

This script:

1. Extracts all TESE-* and RF-* IDs from the documentation.
2. Extracts all <!-- Traces: ... --> markers from the draft.
3. Computes coverage percentages.
4. Flags any undocumented assertions found in the draft (arguments without trace markers).
5. Outputs a structured report.

Scripted Operations

1) Verify documentation readiness (read-only)

python3 scripts/check_readiness.py <repo-path>

Returns exit code 0 if ready for drafting, exit code 1 if BLOCKERs exist.

2) Verify draft coverage (read-only)

python3 scripts/verify_coverage.py <repo-path> <draft-path>

The Docs-First Cycle for Law

This skill fits into the broader cycle:

1. Caso / Necessidade
   ↓
2. Documentação estruturada (plan-legal-docs)
   ↓
3. Auditoria → Decisões humanas
   ↓
4. Documentação consolidada
   ↓
5. Redação guiada (draft-legal-piece) ← you are here
   ↓
6. Verificação de cobertura
   ↓
7. Revisão humana → Ajustes na documentação
   ↓
8. Nova redação (se necessário)
   ↓
9. Próximo incremento (contestação, recurso, aditivo...)

Each iteration strengthens both the documentation and the piece. The documentation survives the piece — if the case escalates to an appeal, the same docs/ folder serves as the foundation for the next piece, with matérias inherited and adapted.

Escalation Policy

• If documentation has BLOCKERs: refuse writing, explain gaps, suggest plan-legal-docs.
• If the user asks to add arguments not in the documentation: suggest documenting them first (add to the appropriate matéria), then re-run drafting.
• If norms are missing from normas.md: flag as suggestion, do not fabricate.
• If the user insists on including undocumented content: comply but wrap in a visible warning block and exclude from traceability.