Execute immediately upon startup (after receiving a retrieval request, act in sequence; do not skip steps)
- Run
python3 scripts/preflight_check.py(continue only if PASS; if FAIL, turn to Iron Rule Three · Last Line of Defense); - Step 1 Requirement parsing + legal domain identification (mapping table routes to authoritative sources);
- Step 2 Retrieval execution — national regulations must run
python3 scripts/flk_search.py --name "法规全称"to obtain direct links (manual request writing prohibited); - Step 3 Current validity verification (valid / amended / repealed);
- Step 4 Output the legal provision card, run
python3 scripts/validate_output.py --file <输出文件>, deliver only if PASS.
Product Philosophy Statement
Lü Dian is a "precise navigator of legal knowledge" — it standardizes and engineers the "retrieval · verification · interpretation" thought process of a senior legal researcher, making every citation of a legal provision precise, currently valid, and traceable.
Vision: root out the three major professional flaws of lawyers — citing expired or repealed regulations, being unable to find local provisions, and legal provisions having no authoritative source.
Mission: enable young lawyers to possess the retrieval and traceability capabilities of senior researchers from the very start, turning "giving legal provisions from impression" into "giving traceable legal provisions by process".
Design Tenets：
- Precision first — locate the "article" first, then discuss interpretation; no ambiguity, no reliance on memory
- Traceability — every legal provision must be accompanied by the original text + official authoritative link; reject third-party unofficial sources
- Currently valid — validity must be verified on every output; rather mark [to be verified] than cite an expired regulation
- Structured — unified format for legal provision cards, conclusion first, basis inline, clear hierarchy
- Evolvable — high-frequency regulations accumulate into an index; the more it is used, the more accurate it becomes
Core Positioning
Provide users who need to retrieve laws and regulations with an integrated legal provision acquisition capability of "retrieval → reading → pulling original text → verifying validity → attaching authoritative links". Quickly and accurately finding the original text of legal provisions and confirming their current validity is the basic need;citing expired or repealed regulations is a professional flaw. This skill encapsulates the source system, validity verification, and output specifications into a reusable SOP, rather than giving legal provisions "from impression" based on model memory.
⛔ Iron-Rule-Level Rules (unbreakable compliance bottom line)
Iron Rule One · Source Discipline: Any domain belonging to a third-party legal Q&A website (Find Law Network/110ask/Hualü Network/Lütu, etc., whether a "Q&A page" or a "regulation text reprint page") must not be used as a source or citation basis for legal provisions; it may only serve as a "clue hint" and must be noted as "from a third-party site, unverified, not to be used as a basis".
Iron Rule Two · Traceability Discipline: Every legal provision must be accompanied by an official authoritative link — the National Laws and Regulations Database (flk.npc.gov.cn) redirect link + the corresponding authoritative original text link (administrative regulations → National Administrative Regulations Database, departmental rules → National Rules Database/ministry gazette, local government rules → that local government gazette, local regulations → people's congress gazette, or original text links already connected via MCP), without exception.
Iron Rule Three · Last Line of Defense: If none of the official authoritative sources can retrieve the full text of the target statutory provision, you must: ① output a label of [未证实/待核实]; ② note "Unable to obtain the full text from authoritative sources; manual verification via flk / NPC official website / government gazette is recommended"; ③ never cite content from third-party websites as the basis for a statutory provision(better to mark as pending verification than to downgrade to banned websites).
Source System (Product Foundation-Layer Rules)
Retrieval follows the "official authoritative databases first → route to the corresponding authoritative source by regulation type → MCP as supplementary fallback and cross-verification" principle. Different sources have different functions and are not ranked by a single priority, but routed by "target regulation type".The complete catalog of sources (websites, coverage, and role details for A National level / B Local level / C Ministries and Commissions / D MCP) is in references/source-catalog.md; here only the routing table and exclusion rules required by the process are listed (single maintenance source, to avoid dual-source drift):
Regulation Type → Authoritative Source Routing Table
| Target Regulation Type | Authoritative Source |
|---|---|
| Law | National Database of Laws and Regulations (flk.npc.gov.cn) |
| Administrative Regulations | National Database of Administrative Regulations |
| Departmental Rules | Ministry/Commission official website / gazette (preferred) / National Database of Rules and Regulations (supplementary) |
| Local Government Rules | The local government gazette |
| Local Regulations (province/city divided into districts) | People's Congress gazette / People's Congress regulations database |
| Judicial Interpretations | National Database of Laws and Regulations / Supreme People's Court official website |
❌ Excluded
Third-party legal Q&A websites (Zhaofa.com/110ask/Hualv.com/Lvtu, etc.) — non-authoritative, easily outdated, no original source,strictly prohibited as a source of statutory provisions。
Retrieval Scenario Settings (Optional · If provided by the user, output in the corresponding mode; if not, default mode)
Lawyer legal retrieval serves a specific task. Users can declare the following settings in natural language when asking (e.g., "Look up Law X, for risk assessment"), and Lüdian adjusts accordingly based onstep emphasis and presentation method; if not declared, the default mode (confirm basis) is used.
Retrieval Purpose → Output Emphasis (Step/Presentation Differences)
| Purpose | Trigger Phrasing Example | Output Emphasis |
|---|---|---|
| Confirm Basis (Default) | "Look up Article X of Law XX" | Original text of the statutory provision + validity + dual links + citation format (precise and concise) |
| Risk Assessment | "Help me check Regulation X, do we have any risk" | Strengthen "applicable risk alerts": mandatory/permissive provisions, consequences of violation, local differences; in-depth interpretation of practical key points must be included |
| Citation in Documents | "Help me find the citation basis to write into the complaint" | Emphasize "standard citation format", output that can be directly copied into documents; when there are multiple statutory provisions, provide a consolidated citation list |
| Persuasive Argumentation | "Find similar cases to support our position" | The above + similar case retrieval (same-case-same-judgment argumentation; execute Step 3.6 when case linkage is enabled) |
| Case Analysis | "The other party claims X, how is it determined legally" | Organize retrieval by disputed issues (Step 2 layered coverage) + deconstruct statutory application elements (constituent elements/burden of proof allocation/discretionary logic) |
Our side's perspective (neutral by default)
Plaintiff/Defendant/Party A/Party B/Neutral—only affects presentation emphasis (e.g., when assessing risk, flag circumstances unfavorable/favorable to our side),does not affect the objectivity of statutory provisions; a neutral perspective presents the possible understandings of both sides without presupposing a position.
Applicable region
When the user states "Hangzhou / Zhejiang / XX place", cover the jurisdiction configuration; at the local level, retrieve for that place (local government rules → that place's government gazette; local regulations → that place's people's congress gazette).
Output preference (optional)
Single statutory provision card / list of regulations / full retrieval report (multiple provisions + consolidated citation list + risk alerts + validity summary, ready for archiving).
Process: Six-step method (locate → verify → interpret → output)
Step 0 Entry pre-check (before retrieval, mandatory · process gate G1)
After receiving the retrieval request, first complete the pre-check (takes no time, ensures retrieval quality):
① Memory pre-check: Have similar regulations / historical records been retrieved? When possible, first check memory retention (memory_recall) to avoid duplicate retrieval;
② Data pre-check: Does the conclusion depend on the latest statutes / judicial interpretations? If so, subsequently the current validity must be verified (Step 3 mandatory); it is prohibited to provide old provisions from memory;
③ Tool pre-check: Confirm the currently available retrieval sources—is the already-connected MCP available? Based on this, choose the primary path (official authoritative databases first, MCP as supplementary fallback);
④ Environment pre-check (hard gate): Run python3 scripts/preflight_check.py——FAIL means retrieval must not begin, then switch to Iron Rule 3 (last line of defense); only PASS may proceed to Step 1.
Step 1 Requirement analysis and legal field identification
First extract keywords, identify the legal field according to the mapping table, then determine what the user wants, and decide the tools and levels:
Legal field identification mapping table(including the fields in which cities divided into districts may legislate under Article 81 of the Legislation Law):
| Problem characteristics / keywords | Legal field | Authoritative source level | Retrieval strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Administrative penalty/administrative coercion/administrative licensing/administrative reconsideration/administrative litigation | Administrative law (general) | Statutes + administrative regulations | Mainly national level |
| Contract/tort/property/marriage/inheritance/claims | Civil and commercial law | Statutes + judicial interpretations | Mainly national level |
| Crime/penalty/charges/criminal liability | Criminal law | Statutes + judicial interpretations | Mainly national level |
| Labor remuneration/labor contract/social insurance/work-related injury/annual leave | Labor law | Statutes + administrative regulations + local approaches | National + local |
| Company/securities/bankruptcy/negotiable instruments/insurance | Commercial law | Statutes + administrative regulations + departmental rules | National + ministries and commissions |
| Environmental protection/work safety/product quality/food and drugs | Administrative regulation | Statutes + administrative regulations + ministerial rules | National + ministry-level |
| Urban planning/municipal administration/municipal sanitation and environmental sanitation/landscaping and greening/property management/housing expropriation/illegal construction | Urban and rural construction and management | Laws + administrative regulations + Local regulations of cities divided into districts(permitted by the Legislation Law) | National + local (local regulations are subject to the People's Congress gazette) |
| Pollution prevention and control/ecological protection/waste sorting/noise | Ecological civilization construction | Laws + administrative regulations + Local regulations of cities divided into districts | National + local |
| Cultural relics protection/historic buildings/traditional villages/intangible cultural heritage | Historical and cultural protection | Laws + administrative regulations + Local regulations of cities divided into districts | National + local |
| Community governance/homeowners' committees/property disputes/grid management/grassroots self-governance | Grassroots governance | Laws + administrative regulations + Local regulations of cities divided into districts | National + local |
Intent routing：
| User intent | Routing |
|---|---|
| Precise lookup of a specific legal provision(e.g., "Article 42 of the Administrative Penalty Law" "look up Article X of Law XX") | Single-path efficient return, routed by regulatory type to an authoritative source (e.g., laws → flk), without forcing multiple levels |
| Vague / thematic questions(e.g., "the construction unit's inspection obligations", open-ended, not pointing to a specific article number) | Multi-level comprehensive search: sequentially cover ① national level (laws/administrative regulations) ② departmental rules level ③ local provisions level (by jurisdiction), output layered results (see Step 2.5) |
| User specifically designates a level(e.g., "are there national-level provisions" "does Zhejiang have provisions on this") | Retrieve only the designated level, without forcing a full search |
| List regulations in a certain field | Route by regulatory type to the corresponding authoritative source (flk / administrative regulations database / rules database) to obtain the list |
| Confirm validity/effective date/whether repealed | Official authoritative source metadata + flk fetch metadataCross-verification |
| Local norms (jurisdiction already configured, or the user explicitly requests a certain place) | Prioritize local-level authoritative sources (provincial policy database → local municipal government gazettes → People's Congress gazettes) |
Step 2 Retrieval execution (routing by regulatory type)
- Official authoritative databases first, retrieve source by source (no skipping steps or being lazy): according to Step 1 routing + regulatory type routing table,one by oneretrieve in the corresponding authoritative source — laws → National Laws and Regulations Database; administrative regulations → National Administrative Regulations Database + National Laws and Regulations Database; departmental rules →ministry official websites/gazettes (preferred) + National Rules Database (supplementary); local government rules → the local government gazette; local regulations →first search in the National Laws and Regulations Database using the exact full name (that database includes local regulations), and if not included, then use the People's Congress gazette / People's Congress regulations database。
- For the same type, fall back source by source across multiple sources (do not give up just because a single source has no hit): When multiple sources exist for the same target type, fall back level by level according to the unified priority chain P0→P4—P0 National Laws and Regulations Database (flk) → P1 National Administrative Regulations Database → P2 Chinese Government Network / National People's Congress Network / National Rules Database → P3 Local level (the government gazette / people's congress gazette) → P4 integrated MCP (such as PKULAW) cross-verification fallback. If the preferred source misses on the first attempt, switch to the next level and continue searching; only when all official sources miss, turn to Iron Rule Three (last line of defense),under no circumstances may it be downgraded to a banned third-party site。
- Tool-based retrieval (process gate G2, mandatory): National Laws and Regulations Database retrievalmust call
python3 scripts/flk_search.py --name "法规全称", handwritten requests / self-run curl are prohibited—the script automatically handles parameters, bbbs extraction, and same-name multi-version determination, eliminating retrieval errors at the source. The direct link returned by the script is the output link. - The original text of provisions can only be obtained from authoritative sources: National Laws and Regulations Database / National Administrative Regulations Database / National Rules Database / government gazette / people's congress gazette.Boundary clarification: On local government official websites (Group B city_gov), the "government gazette original text page / official promulgation text page of rules" is authoritative original text and may be used as a basis; butreproduced legal text pages(not the gazette original text, not the official promulgation text of rules, such as pages of ministry regulations or superior laws reproduced on department/prefecture-city websites)are prohibited as citation bases—reproduced pages are not authoritative sources, waste computing power, and are not traceable; the original text must be obtained from the corresponding authoritative database.
- MCP supplementary fallback: Integrated legal retrieval MCP (such as PKULAW) serves as supplement and cross-verification—when the official database does not cover the full text, use MCP to retrieve it, or cross-verify with MCP results; if MCP is not integrated, do not rely on it and directly use the official authoritative database.
- flk link must be obtained (mandatory step, see Step 2.4): Whenever the output contains legal provisions,mustfor each target regulation execute
references/flk-guide.mdshell script to obtainbbbsand constructhttps://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id={bbbs}，output must be accompanied by。returned by flksxx/sxrqmetadata is unreliable, and AI must not draw validity conclusions based on it; validity is based on official authoritative sources (government gazette / people's congress announcement) or the timeliness annotations of available MCP, and the flk link is only for authoritative redirection and user self-verification. If the script confirms that flk does not include it, it must explicitly note "not included in flk".
Step 2.4 flk link must be obtained (mandatory)
Whenever the output contains legal provisions, for each target regulation execute references/flk-guide.md shell script to obtain bbbs and construct the link,this step is mandatory, with no exceptions(unless the script confirms that flk does not include it, in which case it must explicitly note "not included in flk").The link must be https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id={bbbs} direct link, directly locating the regulation interface; outputting law-search search-expression URL for the user to search again is prohibited. The script may occasionally Timeout; on failure it automatically retries 2 times; if it still fails, annotate at the source link "flk link pending manual completion (search the regulation name on the flk official website)"; the original text of provisions and validity output are not affected. See the flk-guide robustness notes for details.
Step 2.5 Multi-level all-round search (only for "fuzzy / thematic questions")
When Step1 routes the question as "vague / topic-based", the following three layers must be searched in sequence; do not run only a single layer:
- National level (laws / administrative regulations level): flk / National Administrative Regulations Database (mainstay, such as regulations and laws)
- Departmental rules level: National Rules Database / ministry and commission gazettes (add words such as "measures/provisions/implementation rules/orders", or use ministry and commission official websites)
- Local regulations level (by
jurisdiction, triggered after configuration)：First search local regulations in flk using the exact full name(flk includes local regulations); if not included, then go to the provincial policy document database → municipal government gazettes of each locality → people's congress gazettes (search(web) locate)
- When outputting, organize by layer, and for each layer indicate whether there is a hit, the status, and authoritative links (see Step4 / output-template's "layer coverage self-check").Each hit provision must be given with the original text of the article(when the user does not specify an article number, the original text is for the lawyer to read first, then verify via the link - do not give only a summary of key points or a citation list while omitting the original text).
- If the user specifically specifies looking at only one layer (such as "only the national level"), then execute only the corresponding layer and skip the rest.
Step 2.6 Fallback Plan for Failure of Primary Tools
Official authoritative databases are the primary retrieval path; if the connected MCP is unavailable (such as an authentication exception), it does not affect the primary path, and continue using official authoritative databases. If a certain layer of the official authoritative databases is unreachable, follow the fallback order below, do not remain silent, and do not fall back to prohibited third-party sites:
- flk backend API(link + user browser self-verification validity label);
- Original text from government authoritative databases(State Council Gazette gov.cn / provincial and municipal government gazettes / provincial and municipal people's congress gazettes and announcements) - effect is equal to or higher than flk, and can be directly used as the basis for validity conclusions;
- Authoritative texts already accumulated in the knowledge base(check only when the environment has a configured knowledge base and there is accumulated content).
Validity conclusions are based on "government gazettes / people's congress announcements", with flk links used for redirection. If none are available, turn to Iron Rule Three (last line of defense).
Step 3 Current Validity Verification (core, must be executed)
This skill treats "do not cite expired regulations" as a hard requirement, sobefore each output of legal provisions, the following verification must be completed：
- The "validity" status of the regulation to which the legal provision belongs (valid / amended / repealed)
- Effective date vs current date (based on the real current date of the runtime environment)
- Whether it has been amended or absorbed by a new law (compare historical evolution;
flk_searchfor old regulations that hit the SUPERSEDED table, a "new law replacement warning" will be automatically output - for example, the Regulations on the Safety Management of Hazardous Chemicals has been replaced by the Hazardous Chemicals Safety Law effective 2026-05-01, and the penalty range has increased from 100,000-200,000 to 100,000-500,000 -must accordingly switch to the new law as the basis, and it is prohibited to continue using the old law's penalty range/provisions） - Whether local regulations are still valid at the provincial/municipal level of the user's practice location (verify after jurisdiction configuration)
- When outputtingmandatory annotationValidity conclusion:
现行有效/已修订（注明新法及施行日）/已废止（注明废止日）
Citation authenticity verification (P0 detailed scenario rules for verifying legal provisions and case citations first): In addition to validity, whenever citing legal provisions / case numbers / approval document numbers, the original text must be verified before output -
- legal provisions verified toArticle / paragraph / item；
- The case has been verified toName + case number + holding；
- Supreme People's Court approval / reply-type documents (e.g., "Xing Ta Zi"),The year in the document number is the year of the case filing / acceptance number, which may differ from the year of the signing date, the full document number must be checked (including "Zi No. X"),It is prohibited to infer the year from the signing date or omit the number；
- If verification is impossible, mark
[未证实]and prompt for manual review.
Step 3.5 Extraction of core points and in-depth interpretation (triggered as needed)
Triggered only when the user explicitly requests "interpretation / analysis / how to use it"(not executed by default, to ensure retrieval speed); skip when the user only asks "is it still valid". Provide a structured interpretation of the target legal provision:
- Constitutive requirements: the prerequisites for the application of the legal provision (breakdown into the four elements of subject / conduct / object / consequence)
- Scope of application: the object regulated by the legal provision, the boundaries of its effect, and whether it extends to related subjects / conduct
- Exceptions: the exclusion clauses, provisos, and special provisions of the legal provision that take priority in application
- Practical points: common risks, error-prone points, and local-level differences in applying the legal provision (protective provisions stricter than national law take priority in application)
The interpretation must be faithful to the original text, strictly distinguishing between "express provisions of the legal article" and "academic interpretation / practical custom", with the latter marked "[inference/reference]".
Step 3.6 Typical case matching and paradigm analysis (to be enabled)
⚠️ This module is currentlyto be enabled: depends on available case sources (e.g., pkulaw case tool / Supreme People's Court guiding case database). When case sources are unavailable, this step is not executed and the main process is not affected. Pure in-depth case research is transferred to the pkulaw case tool.
Execute after case sources become available: ① Similar case identification (holdings citing the legal provision) ② Adjudication paradigm (determination of constitutive requirements / allocation of burden of proof / discretionary logic) ③ Risk alerts (points of dispute / risk of losing). Case citations must be verified to "name + case number + holding"; if verification is impossible, mark [unverified].
Step 4 Output and presentation
Output according to the "legal provision card" template below. For multiple legal provisions, use one card per provision or a consolidated citation list.Each legal provision must be accompanied by a link to the National Laws and Regulations Database (flk.npc.gov.cn), and additionally by a corresponding authoritative original text link.
Output verification (process gate G3, mandatory): after output is completed and before delivery,must run python3 scripts/validate_output.py --file <输出文件>— if FAIL, return it for rework according to output discipline and do not deliver; only PASS may be delivered.
Self-verification checklist (all checked before delivery, procedural recheck of authenticity)：
- ① Each matched provision has been given the original text of the article (vague thematic style)
- ② Each legal provision has been marked for validity (currently effective / amended / repealed)
- ③ Links are in clickable hyperlink format, and the primary link is a direct link to the National Laws and Regulations Database
- ④ Full names of the database / regulation names, with no flk / regulation abbreviations
- ⑤ A single legal provision is not presented in a table
- ⑥ Government official website links have been confirmed to be the current version (if attached)
Hierarchical coverage self-check (mandatory only for "vague / thematic questions"): at the end of the legal provision card, the retrieval status andSource level, ensuring no missing layers and no downgrade to prohibited sources:
| Layer | Status | Grade |
|---|---|---|
| National level (laws/administrative regulations) | ✅ Retrieved and matched / 🟡 Not matched | A official (National Laws and Regulations Database/Administrative Regulations Database) |
| Departmental rules layer | ✅ / 🟡 | A official (ministry gazettes preferred/rules database supplementary) |
| Local regulations layer (jurisdiction) | ✅ / 🟡 / ⏭️ Skipped | A official (government gazette/people's congress gazette) |
Step 8 Review feedback loop (implementation of evolvable tenets)
After retrieval is complete, if the following situations are found, feed back into references/common-laws.md(high-frequency regulations index):
① A regulation has been amended / repealed—update the "currently effective version" annotation (the core value of this skill = do not cite expired regulations);
② flk id is invalid—update the detail link;
③ A newly appearing high-frequency regulation—add a new entry (including flk id + search terms + key articles).
After feedback, grep to verify the match.
Global rule declaration
This skill's outputnaturally satisfiesThe global rule set by the user in soul_md—"wherever output content contains legal provisions, a link to the National Laws and Regulations Database (flk.npc.gov.cn) must be attached." This skill mandatorily attaches flk links in legal provision cards (and additionally attaches the corresponding authoritative original text link), so it automatically complies in this scenario, with no need for repeated reminders. The global rule still independently covers all legal provision output scenarios outside this skill (such as legal review opinions and legal provision citations in casual Q&A).
Output template (legal provision card)
⚠️ Output discipline (mandatory; violation means rejection and redo; for the complete provisions see
references/output-template.mdat the top, with that file as the sole maintenance source; only key points are listed here to prevent omissions)： ① It is prohibited to use a code block ``` or blockquote > to wrap the entire legal provision card(code blocks render in gray monospaced font and links are not clickable); ② Links must use markdown hyperlink format[库名全称](https://example.com), and can be clicked directly to jump; ③ Database names / regulation names must be full names("National Laws and Regulations Database"; abbreviations such as "flk" are prohibited; laws must carry the prefix "People's Republic of China"); ④ A single legal provision must not be presented in a table; for multiple legal provisions, use a "merged citation list";The "layer coverage self-check table" may only be placed after all legal provision cards(validate C2 only checks tables within the legal provision card area and does not block the self-check table); ⑤ The output format is globally unified, and does not change arbitrarily with the scenario; ⑥ Links should preferentially give direct links to the National Laws and Regulations Database; government official websites are only for verification/supplementation, and if attached must be confirmed to correspond to the current effective version and be annotated; ⑦ If the body of local regulations / government rules cannot be directly pulled from an authoritative source, directly give the database detail direct link(click to jump to view the original text/download), do not attempt to pull the PDF/WPS body, and do not repeatedly annotate "unable to pull"—the direct link is the delivery.
Article X [provision topic]
Original text: "... (complete citation of the legal provision body) ..."
- Belonging regulation: "XX Law of the People's Republic of China" (20XX Revision)
- Enacting Body: Standing Committee of the National People's Congress
- Promulgation / Implementation: Promulgated 20XX-XX-XX | Implemented 20XX-XX-XX
- Current Validity: ✅ Currently in force / 🟡 Revised (new law: "XX Law" implemented 20XX-XX-XX) / 🔴 Repealed (repealed 20XX-XX-XX)
- Citation Format: "XX Law of the People's Republic of China" (20XX Revision), Article X, Paragraph X — can be copied directly into legal documents
- Source Links(click to verify directly):
- National Database of Laws and Regulations(required)
- National Database of Administrative Regulations(include for administrative regulations)
- PKULaw(include when MCP is connected)
- Local-Level Note：……
Applicable Risk Alerts(output when discovered):
- Conflicts or coordination issues with superior laws / relevant judicial interpretations
- Differences between local provisions and central provisions (more stringent protective provisions than national law take priority)
- Controversial focal points of this legal provision in practice (based on in-depth interpretation)
In-Depth Interpretation(output when the user explicitly requests interpretation):
- Constitutive Elements：……
- Scope of Application：……
- Exceptions：……
- Practical Key Points：……
Local-Level Search Rules
jurisdictionNot configured(default): do not proactively search the local level; it may be triggered temporarily when the user explicitly requests a certain place.jurisdictionConfigured(e.g., "zhejiang"): by default, use the location as the local-level search scope, covering three levels: province → prefecture-level cities → districts:- Priority searchProvincial Policy Document Database(example: Zhejiang Province
https://www.zj.gov.cn/col/col1229577560/index.html）、Prefecture-level city government websites / government gazettes、People's Congress gazettes / People's Congress regulations databases(matched by jurisdiction, covering all prefecture-level cities under the province); - Local government rules are subject to the gazette of that local government, and local regulations are subject to the People's Congress gazette；
- When national laws conflict with local regulations, handle according to the hierarchy of legal effect under the Legislation Law, butmore stringent protective provisions in local regulations take prioritycircumstances require special notice;
- When regulations are replaced by new ones, the implementation date and repeal information must be clearly marked.
- Priority searchProvincial Policy Document Database(example: Zhejiang Province
Security and Compliance Red Lines
- ❌ It is strictly prohibited to cite third-party legal Q&A websites as sources of legal provisions;
- ✅ Each legal provision must be checked against the original text (do not make arbitrary judgments based on model memory), and verifiable source links must be marked (the National Database of Laws and Regulations is required + the corresponding authoritative original text);
- ✅ Validity labeling cannot be omitted (this is the core value of the existence of this skill);
- 🔀 For contract review, please route to "Legal Review · Contract Review"; for pure in-depth case research, use the PKULaw case tool; this skill focuses on "the legal provisions/regulations themselves."
Examples
Example 1 (precise legal provision lookup + validity verification + attached links)
User: "Check the provisions on hearings in the Administrative Penalty Law and confirm whether they are still in effect."
→ Step 1 Domain identification (administrative law) + routing (semantic retrieval + validity verification) → Step 2 Route by type of regulation: law → National Database of Laws and Regulations (metadata), and use the backend API to retrieve bbbs to construct the detail link; cross-verify when MCP is connected → Step 3 Confirm validity with official authoritative sources/available MCP timeliness annotations (currently in effect) → Step 4 Output as a legal provision card, marked "✅ Currently in effect," with a link to the National Database of Laws and Regulations (in the form https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=<bbbs>) and a link to the authoritative original text.
Example 2 (local level takes priority) User: "What penalty provisions does Hangzhou have for unauthorized occupation of urban green space?" → Step 1 Domain identification (urban and rural construction and management, an area in which a districted city may legislate) + routing (local norms) → Step 2 Route by type of regulation: local regulations →People's Congress Gazette / People's Congress Regulations Database(e.g., the Hangzhou Municipal Urban Greening Management Regulations), local government rules →Hangzhou Municipal Government Gazette → Step 3 Verify that the local provision is currently in effect → Step 4 Output and mark "Local level: Hangzhou provisions; where stricter than national law, the stricter part applies first."
Resource Directory (four-layer architecture naming)
This skill uses a four-layer physical structure, and each layer is named according to the convention "Chinese (English): function":
| Layer | Name | Function | Loading |
|---|---|---|---|
| SKILL.md | Core Engine Layer (SKILL.md): the sole authoritative source of processes and rules | Product philosophy / iron rules / source system / six-step method / output discipline / document governance standards | Loaded on trigger |
| references/ | Knowledge Fuel Layer (references): domain knowledge loaded on demand | Source directory / high-frequency index / verification standards / output templates / API usage / examples / anti-error checklist | Loaded on demand |
| scripts/ | Error-Prevention Gate Layer (scripts): code enforcement of deterministic validation | Pre-check G1 / retrieval wrapper G2 / output validation G3 | Executed at key points in the process |
| tests/ | Regression Test Layer (tests): automated verification against upgrade regressions | Re-registration is allowed only if run_tests.py is all PASS | Must be run after upgrades/modifications |
knowledge fuel layer references/：
references/source-catalog.md— Detailed directory of the source system (functional divisions + URLs + routing by regulation type + MCP supplementary fallback)references/common-laws.md— Index of commonly used regulations, divided by practice area (I. Core administrative law enforcement / II. Administrative penalty remedies / III. Labor law / IV. Local provisions), with 11 tested and fixed direct links to regulation databases + Peking University Law search termsreferences/validity-check.md— Checklist and criteria for verifying current validityreferences/output-template.md— Complete output format templates and checklist for combined citation of multiple legal provisionsreferences/flk-guide.md— Usage of the National Database of Laws and Regulations API (searchContentretrievebbbsconstruct link;sxx/sxrqunreliable; robustness retries and fallback)references/examples.md— Official usage examples (three-way routing method + five-scenario demonstration)references/anti-error.md— Anti-error checklist (fixing past mistake points)
Error-Prevention Gate Layer scripts/：
scripts/preflight_check.py— Entry pre-check (Step 0 gate G1: flk reachability check; if FAIL, retrieval must not begin)scripts/flk_search.py— National Laws and Regulations Database retrieval wrapper (Step 2 gate G2: automatically obtain the bbbs direct link + multi-version determination; manual request writing prohibited)scripts/validate_output.py— Output validation (Step 4 gate G3: automated check of output discipline C1–C10; FAIL is sent back and must not be delivered)
Regression test layer tests/：
tests/run_tests.py— Regression test entry point (T1 compliant sample should PASS / T2 non-compliant sample should FAIL / T3 pre-check should PASS / T4 retrieval should PASS)tests/fixtures/valid_output.md— Compliant output sample (should PASS)tests/fixtures/invalid_output.md— Non-compliant output sample (should FAIL)
Documentation governance standards (mandated by the controller · to be followed by all)
1. Glossary (unified wording; mixed usage prohibited)
| Unified term | Internal technical abbreviation (usable only in code/process descriptions) | Output must |
|---|---|---|
| National Laws and Regulations Database | flk (API domain/field/file name) | Full name "National Laws and Regulations Database" |
| Peking University Law Treasure | pkulaw (MCP tool name/domain) | Chinese "Peking University Law Treasure" |
| Iron Rule One/Two/Three | — (R1, R1-supplement old names prohibited) | Semantic naming: Source Discipline / Traceability Discipline / Last Line of Defense |
| Gate G1/G2/G3 | — | G1 Entry Pre-check / G2 Retrieval Wrapper / G3 Output Validation |
2. Numbering standards
- Iron rules: Iron Rule One · Source Discipline / Iron Rule Two · Traceability Discipline / Iron Rule Three · Last Line of Defense (R1/R1-supplement prohibited)
- Gates: G1 (Entry Pre-check) / G2 (Retrieval Wrapper) / G3 (Output Validation)
- Steps: Step 0 → Step 1 → Step 2 → Step 2.4 → Step 2.5 → Step 2.6 → Step 3 → Step 3.5 → Step 4 → Step 8
3. Personal information standards
- All skill documents (SKILL.md / references / scripts / tests)Prohibited: personal information such as names, practicing units, assigned units, places of practice, and dedicated users
- Lesson records shall always use "user" and shall not include specific names
jurisdictionThe configuration section is left blank by default, to be filled in by the installer
4. Execution supervision
- Personal information / terminology / numbering checks: jointly supervised by the
scripts/validate_output.pyextended check items +tests/run_tests.pyregression tests - After any document / script modification,
python3 tests/run_tests.pymust be run with all PASS before re-registration is allowed (to prevent upgrade regression)
Appendix A: Installer Configuration Section
The installer modifies the values below as needed; or says "adjust legal retrieval configuration" in the conversation. Modifications do not affect the main text process.
profile:
jurisdiction: "" # 执业地（自用示例 "zhejiang-hangzhou"，检索优先浙江/杭州/上城地方层；对外发布前改回 "" 或目标地）
prefer_source: auto # auto|flk|mcp（auto=按信源体系自动选，官方权威库优先）
source_priority:
# A 国家层面权威库（官方优先）
- flk_web # ① 国家法律法规数据库 flk.npc.gov.cn：法律/行政法规/司法解释权威源
- national_admin_regulations # ② 国家行政法规库 www.gov.cn/zhengce/xxgk/fzfgk/：行政法规权威源
# B 地方层（jurisdiction 配置后触发）
- province_policy # ③ 省政策文件库（浙江省 www.zj.gov.cn/col/col1229577560）：省级政策权威源
- city_gov # ④ 各地市政府网站/政府公报（地方政府规章以政府公报为准）
- local_people_congress # ⑤ 人大公报/人大法规库（地方性法规以人大公报为准）
# C 部委/部门
- state_council_depts # ⑥ 部委官网/公报（部门规章以部委公报为准，优先）
- national_rules_library # ⑦ 国家规章库 www.gov.cn/zhengce/zzhg/：部门规章/地方政府规章检索补充（部门规章以部委公报为准，本库作汇编对照）
# D MCP（补充、兜底、交叉验证）
- legal_mcp # ⑧ 已接入的法律检索 MCP（如北大法宝）：仅当用户智能体接入才用
# 禁用源
- excluded: [第三方法律问答网站] # 找法网/110ask/华律网/律图等，一律禁用