Update eu-ai-act-reviewer plugin to v1.0.2

Mirrors the v1.0.2 release from bencium/eu-ai-act-guide, byte-identical
to the published ZIP (SHA-256 ad02ac60...). Findings that report a
human-facing Article 50 disclosure duty now link the official EU icons
page rather than describing the icon set from memory, and the
not-legal-advice statement appears in every response rather than only in
a finished report.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@
       "name": "eu-ai-act-reviewer",
       "source": "./eu-ai-act-reviewer",
       "description": "Review user journeys, public content, and codebases for potentially relevant EU AI Act provisions, with exact official citations, evidence gaps, application dates, and plain-language next actions. Issue-spotting only — never a legal or compliance verdict.",
-      "version": "1.0.1",
+      "version": "1.0.2",
       "author": { "name": "bencium.io", "url": "https://bencium.io" },
       "category": "compliance",
       "keywords": ["bence", "eu-ai-act", "compliance", "legal", "regulation", "article-50"]

eu-ai-act-reviewer/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "eu-ai-act-reviewer",
-  "version": "1.0.1",
+  "version": "1.0.2",
   "description": "Review user journeys, public content, and codebases for potentially relevant EU AI Act provisions, with exact official citations, evidence gaps, application dates, and plain-language next actions. Issue-spotting only — never a legal or compliance verdict.",
   "author": { "name": "bencium.io", "url": "https://bencium.io" },
   "keywords": ["eu-ai-act", "compliance", "legal", "review", "regulation", "article-50"]

eu-ai-act-reviewer/skills/eu-ai-act-reviewer/SKILL.md

@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ Review evidence for EU AI Act issues without issuing a legal opinion or a compli
 - Keep supplied journeys, content, code, screenshots, logs, and business details local. Never paste private material into a web search or external service. Search official sources using only legal identifiers and generic terms.
 - Review only the EU AI Act. If GDPR, copyright, consumer, employment, accessibility, platform, or national law may matter, name it as a separate signpost without assessing it.
 - Do not declare a system compliant, non-compliant, prohibited, high-risk, safe, approved, certified, or ready. Do not calculate a compliance score or predict a fine.
+- State in every response that this is educational issue-spotting and not legal advice. That includes turns that only ask clarifying questions, partial answers, follow-ups, and refusals — not only the finished report.
 - Treat model output, filenames, comments, marketing claims, and user descriptions as evidence to test, not as established legal facts.
 
 ## Load the references
@@ -74,6 +75,7 @@ Prioritise findings by likely effect on people and time sensitivity, but do not
 
 Before returning the review, confirm that:
 
+- the response says it is not legal advice, whatever its length or form;
 - the legal currency statement is present and honest, and names any verification step that failed or was skipped;
 - each finding contains all ten required fields;
 - facts, inferences, missing facts, and source levels are visibly separate;

eu-ai-act-reviewer/skills/eu-ai-act-reviewer/references/article-50-content-labelling.md

@@ -88,6 +88,18 @@ The regulation does not prescribe one universal sentence, icon, colour, or place
 
 When the user requests the legal minimum, do not add a broader “label everything” policy. Return the narrow supported finding and identify missing facts.
 
+## Always link the current official icons
+
+When a finding reports a human-facing disclosure duty under Article 50(1), (3), (4), or (5), link the official EU icons page in that finding. Never describe the icon set from memory. That page is revised, and the icons, file formats, and variants it offers change; linking it lets the reader see the set that exists today.
+
+State the Commission's own position alongside the link:
+
+> The use of these EU icons is optional, but the labelling requirements under Article 50 AI Act are not. The use of these icons does not establish legal compliance by itself. Deployers remain responsible for ensuring that any disclosure meets the requirements of Article 50 AI Act. Signatories of the Code of Practice on marking and labelling of AI-generated content must duly implement the measures it contains.
+
+Design note, offered as a suggestion only. Because the regulation prescribes no specific icon, an organisation may design its own mark so the disclosure fits its brand rather than sitting on the page as a foreign asset. A custom mark carries the same burden as the official one: it must be clear and distinguishable, present no later than first exposure, accessible, and accompanied by understandable words where an icon alone would not convey artificial generation. Choosing the official icon, a custom mark, or plain words changes none of the underlying duties.
+
+Put this suggestion in the finding's next action or in a closing note. Never place it in the official source level field, and never label it `Law`, `Official guidance`, or `Voluntary code` — it is a design opinion, not a source of authority.
+
 ## Common review errors
 
 - Mixing the provider's machine-readable mark with the deployer's human-facing disclosure.

eu-ai-act-reviewer/skills/eu-ai-act-reviewer/references/output-contract.md

@@ -2,6 +2,12 @@
 
 Write the report in plain English. Do not use a compliance score, traffic-light grade, pass/fail result, or final legal classification.
 
+## The statement that always appears
+
+Every response this skill produces states that it is educational EU AI Act issue-spotting, not legal advice, and not proof that any duty is or is not met.
+
+This holds without exception: the full report, a turn that only asks clarifying questions, a partial or interrupted answer, a single-finding follow-up, a correction, a refusal, and every later message in the same conversation. Length is never a reason to drop it — a one-line reply about one article still carries it. No one may receive output from this skill that could be mistaken for a lawyer's answer.
+
 ## Report header
 
 Start with: