clearance

What the source does

• FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
• NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
• ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
• DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
• SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

If the user says "provisional," run the clearance normally using these generic defaults: middle risk appetite, lawyer role, US jurisdiction (USPTO + common-law), no playbook (do the full analysis rath

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha cb488a888d20 · 31 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

• Publisheranthropics GitHub organizationOwner of the repository this skill is read from
• Source folderanthropics/claude-for-legal/ip-legal/skills/clearanceThe exact folder we audited
• LicenceApache-2.0As the repository states it
• Commit pinned for this verdictcb488a888d20A new audit runs when the source changes
• Repository statusNot archivedLast push 1 day ago
• Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

Its description: Trademark clearance first pass — knockout + similar-marks check producing a flag list, not a clearance opinion. Use when a new mark is proposed, when asked whether a mark is available or to run a knockout search, or…

---
name: clearance
description: >
  Trademark clearance first pass — knockout + similar-marks check producing a
  flag list, not a clearance opinion. Use when a new mark is proposed, when
  asked whether a mark is available or to run a knockout search, or when
  assessing likelihood-of-confusion factors before a full professional search.
  This skill never concludes a mark is clear.
argument-hint: "[describe the proposed mark, goods/services, and jurisdictions — or just the mark and I'll ask]"
---

# /clearance

**This is a triage, not a clearance opinion.** A trademark clearance opinion
requires a full professional search and registered trademark counsel's
judgment. A "no obvious conflicts" result means the triage
didn't find anything — it does not mean the mark is clear. Clients have been
sued over marks that passed a knockout search.

## Instructions

1. Read `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/ip-legal/CLAUDE.md`. If it
   contains `[PLACEHOLDER]`, stop and direct to `/ip-legal:cold-start-interview`.
2. Follow the workflow below.
3. Run intake (mark, goods/services, classes, jurisdictions, visual/stylization).
4. Knockout check for intrinsic bars — generic, descriptive, deceptive,
   geographic, surname, false connection, prohibited matter, functional.
5. Similar-marks search against what's connected (Solve Intelligence, CourtListener, Descrybe, or whatever MCP is available). If nothing is
   connected, say so in the output and proceed with the factor analysis only.
6. Walk the applicable circuit's likelihood-of-confusion factors — du Pont /
   Polaroid / Sleekcraft / other. Flag each; never conclude.
7. Write the triage memo to the matter folder (if a matter is active) or the
   practice outputs folder. Apply the work-product header per role.
8. End with recommended next steps and the non-lawyer gate if the role is
   non-lawyer.

This skill never concludes a mark is clear. If uncertain, flag — the attorney
decides.

## Examples

```
/ip-legal:clearance "APEXLEAF for an outdoor apparel line, planned launch US + EU"
```

```
/ip-legal:clearance
```

(And the skill will ask for the mark, goods, classes, and jurisdictions.)

---

## THIS IS A FIRST PASS, NOT A CLEARANCE OPINION

**Say this at the top of every output. Do not drop it. Do not soften it.**

> **This is a first pass, not a clearance opinion.** A trademark clearance opinion
> requires a full professional search (TESS, state registries, common law sources,
> international registries, domain and social, trade dress and design marks where
> relevant) and attorney judgment on likelihood of confusion, which depends on
> factors a structured triage cannot fully assess. A "no obvious conflicts" result
> from this skill means the triage didn't find anything — it does not mean the
> mark is clear. Clients have been sued over marks that passed a knockout search.
> A registered trademark attorney evaluates before anyone adopts, files, or
> invests in this mark.

This is the loudest guardrail in the plugin. Under-calling a conflict is a
one-way door — a logo on trucks, a product launched, a TM application filed, all
with a problem underneath. Over-calling is a two-way door — the attorney narrows
the list in review. Stay on the two-way door side.

---

## Matter context

**Matter context.** Check `## Matter workspaces` in the practice-level CLAUDE.md. If `Enabled` is `✗` (the default for in-house users), skip the rest of this paragraph — skills use practice-level context and the matter machinery is invisible. If enabled and there is no active matter, ask: "Which matter is this for? Run `/ip-legal:matter-workspace switch <slug>` or say `practice-level`." Load the active matter's `matter.md` for matter-specific context and overrides. Write outputs to the matter folder at `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/ip-legal/matters/<matter-slug>/`. Never read another matter's files unless `Cross-matter context` is `on`.

---

## Load the practice profile first

Before running clearance, read `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/ip-legal/CLAUDE.md`. Pull:

- **Role** from `## Who's using this` (lawyer vs. non-lawyer changes the work-product header and the non-lawyer gate below).
- **Registered in** and **enforce where** from `## IP practice profile` and `## Enforcement posture` (default jurisdictions if the user doesn't specify).
- **Integrations** from `## Available integrations` (CourtListener / Solve Intelligence / Descrybe — each determines what searches are available to run, what the fallback is, and what gets attributed in the output).
- **Decision posture** from `## Decision posture on subjective legal calls` — this skill never concludes "not confusingly similar."

If `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/ip-legal/CLAUDE.md` contains `[PLACEHOLDER]` or `[Your Company Name]`, surface this bounce:

> I notice you haven't configured your practice profile yet — that's how I tailor posture, jurisdictions, and approval chain to your practice.
>
> **Two choices:**
> - Run `/ip-legal:cold-start-interview` (2 minutes) to configure your profile, then I'll run this tailored to YOUR practice.
> - Say **"provisional"** and I'll run this against generic defaults — US jurisdiction, middle risk appetite, lawyer role, no playbook — and tag every output `[PROVISIONAL — configure your profile for tailored output]` so you can see what I do before committing.

### Provisional mode

If the user says "provisional," run the clearance normally using these generic defaults: middle risk appetite, lawyer role, US jurisdiction (USPTO + common-law), no playbook (do the full analysis rather than matching against a position list). Tag the reviewer note and every finding block with `[PROVISIONAL]`. At the end of the output, append:

> "That was a generic run against default assumptions. Run `/ip-legal:cold-start-interview` to get output calibrated to YOUR practice — your playbook, your jurisdiction, your risk appetite. 2 minutes."

---

## Intake

A

Excerpt, first 6,000 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

git clone https://github.com/anthropics/claude-for-legal
git -C claude-for-legal checkout cb488a888d20

Works in

1. 2026-10-31
   ✓SAFE B 89 / 100

   first audit · source cb488a888d20

Questions about clearance

• github.com/anthropics/claude-for-legal/tree/main/ip-legal/skills — the audited source at commit cb488a888d20 and every finding aboveObserved · 31 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology