Skip to content

bingham-architect

Turn messy, conversational, or emotive notes into a structured, dispassionate legal first draft using the Bingham/Sumption syntax protocol (Workflow 1, Phase 1, before the 4-Agent Polisher). Use when asked to draft, structure, or clean up legal writing from rough notes.

Source: .opencode/skills/bingham-architect/SKILL.md — site rebuilt 2026-09-05.

Bingham Architect Drafter

Overview

This skill executes Workflow 1 of the Bingham drafting pipeline. It transforms raw, disorganized, or emotive user notes into a highly structured legal first draft. It does this by enforcing two strict syntactical algorithms: the Factual Statement Formula and the Argument Submission Formula, while deploying a strict "Clause Restrictor" to eradicate conversational drivel.

The output of this skill provides the architectural foundation necessary for the 4-Agent Python pipeline (Workflow 2) to perform its final polish.

Dependencies

This is an instruction-only workflow that applies a specific prompt engineering protocol to the user's input.

Model Selection (CRITICAL)

Always run this skill using a High (Pro) model. This workflow requires deep nuance extraction and complex structural reasoning to map out the initial logic and eradicate emotional drivel. (Reminder: Once this architectural draft is generated, you may switch to a Low/Flash model when running Agents 1 and 2 of your Workflow 2 Python pipeline to maximize speed).

Quick Start

"Please draft these notes into a structured submission using the bingham-architect skill: [Your Notes]"

Workflow

1. Execute the Chain-of-Thought (CoT)

Before generating any draft text, you MUST output a <stylistic_strategy> XML block. In this block, explicitly perform the following: 1. List all emotive language or conversational filler in the user's raw notes that must be eradicated. 2. Outline how you will structure the core facts using the Factual Statement Formula. 3. Outline how you will frame the core arguments using the Legal Submission Formula.

2. Apply the Syntactical Architectures

When drafting the text (after closing the strategy block), you must strictly apply the following structural algorithms:

A. Factual Statements

Facts must exist as independent, objective states. Strip away all narrative flow and causal connectors (do not use "which means", "leading to", or "because"). - Formula: [Reference/Date/Document] + [Objective Event/State]. - Banned: "On 23 January, the Reporter emailed us to say..." - Required: "By email dated 23 January 2026, the Reporter confirmed..."

Arguments are logical inevitabilities, not personal pleas. Never use cognitive verbs ("believe", "think") or pleading adverbs ("strongly"). - Formula: [Institutional Framing] + [The Proposition] + [The Authority/Reason]. - Required Triggers: "It is submitted that...", "It follows that...", "Reliance is placed upon...", "Consideration falls to be given to..." - Banned: "We strongly believe the Recommendation is wrong." - Required: "It is submitted that the Recommendation is vitiated by material errors of fact."

3. Enforce the Clause Restrictor

To prevent the LLM's natural drift into "imprecise drivel": 1. Limit every sentence to a maximum of ONE main clause and ONE subordinate clause. 2. Never use present participles (words ending in -ing, such as leading, meaning, causing, resulting) as lazy conjunctions to connect thoughts. If you have two distinct thoughts, use a full stop. 3. No Verb Stacking (But Infinitives of Purpose are Permitted): You are strictly forbidden from chaining active verbs together to narrate a sequence of events (e.g., do NOT write "deployed to allege to secure"). However, you MUST retain powerful, isolated infinitives of purpose (e.g., "to protect", "to evaluate") when they deliver punchy, objective impact. 4. Targeted Nominalisation (Avoid "Noun Disease"): Convert conversational active verbs into abstract nouns (e.g., change "Because the Reporter decided" to "The decision"). However, you are strictly forbidden from creating heavy prepositional noun stacks (Noun Disease). Do NOT convert punchy infinitives into clunky nouns (e.g., never change "jurisdiction to evaluate" into "jurisdiction for the evaluation of"). Favor devastating concision over algorithmic rigidity. 5. The Pronoun Ban: You are strictly forbidden from using personal pronouns (I, we, you, he, she, they). Exclusively use formal titles (The Reporter, The Respondent, The Committee) or completely remove the actor using the passive voice. 6. The Conjunctive Adverb Ban: Do not begin sentences with conversational signposts (Therefore, Consequently, Importantly, Firstly). If a transition is required, use structural phrasing ("It follows that...") or simply state the next logical fact.

4. Output the Result

Present the final draft immediately following the </stylistic_strategy> block. Do not provide conversational filler.

Common Mistakes

  • The "Assistant" Drift: Acting as a helpful assistant rather than a Senior Scottish Advocate.
  • Narrative Creep: Stringing facts together as a story using words like "because," "causing," or "meaning that."
  • Active Voice: Using active pronouns (e.g., "They failed to exhibit the file" instead of "The file was not exhibited").