Results for “judgment”

Drafts a recordable Abstract of Judgment to create a judgment lien on a debtor's real property. Extracts party names, monetary components, and judgment details from case documents, then applies jurisdiction-specific formatting and certification requirements. Use post-judgment in commercial litigation when enforcing monetary awards, perfecting judgment liens, or preparing lien filings with the county recorder.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Examine important choices and assess claims by rebuilding their reasoning from basic knowledge. Use mental models, reusable ways to understand problems, to compare conclusions, identify unknowns, and consider long-term consequences.

• Choosing a direction with long-term consequences
• Assessing the reasoning behind an expert's claims
• Building judgment in an unfamiliar field

Protocol for handling ambiguous decisions and missing/conflicting knowledge during code generation, design, and review. Ensures AI surfaces genuine judgment calls with structured options and stops on hallucination risk instead of silently assuming. Use when a decision has multiple valid approaches, when facts are missing or contradictory, when the user asks 'what should we do here?', 'is this a judgment call?', 'should I ask about this?', 'am I guessing here?', 'what are the tradeoffs?', or when deciding between two reasonable architectural or design options. Also composed by molecules to define how judgment calls and clarification requests are surfaced and resolved.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Run two independent reviewers against the same fixed target, then compare their findings. With approval, address severe issues confirmed by both and reassess the fixes, using at most two correction rounds before a final verdict.

• Request two independent reviews of a specific target
• Separate confirmed issues from disputed findings
• Fix severe issues confirmed by both reviewers

Trigger: judgment day, judgement day, dual review, adversarial review, juzgar. Run explicit blind dual review with at most two scoped fix/re-judgment rounds.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a Compensation, Benefits, and Job Analysis Specialist — market-pricing a job against salary survey data, scoring a job through a point-factor or IPE job evaluation, running a pay-equity regression or cohort analysis, building or refreshing a salary structure and compa-ratio bands, classifying a job family's FLSA exemption status through the duties test, or modeling benefits plan cost (loss ratio, PEPM, self-funded vs. fully insured). Distinct from hr-people-manager (owns the comp/leveling judgment calls — whether to approve an exception, promote someone into a level), hr-specialist (owns individual-case leave/I-9/ADA/FLSA reclassification for one employee's drifted duties), and compensation-benefits-manager (owns pay philosophy, negotiation-range policy, and the department that runs this work). This role owns the mechanics: the survey match, the point score, the regression, the band math — the analysis those upstream policy and downstream judgment calls are made against.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Build an HTML portfolio presentation for a senior designer interview, using three case studies to explain craft and design judgment. A fixed editorial layout with a neon yellow accent helps organize evidence for the hiring panel.

• Preparing a portfolio presentation for a senior designer interview
• Structuring three design case studies
• Explaining the reasoning behind design decisions

Design criteria for using an LLM to judge AI responses through scoring or comparisons between two answers. Includes checks for order and length bias, plus validation against human judgments to assess evaluation reliability.

• Build an automated evaluation pipeline for AI responses
• Compare responses after changing a prompt or model
• Define shared scoring criteria for reviewers

Build and run evaluations for AI applications using Phoenix. Start with observed failures, create checks in code or use a language model as a judge, run experiments, and validate automated judgments against human labels.

• Turning observed failures into evaluation criteria
• Building code-based or language-model evaluators
• Evaluating retrieval and answer faithfulness in RAG

Design systems that use language models to judge AI responses. Covers scoring criteria, comparisons between two answers, bias reduction, confidence calibration, and checks against human judgments to make automated quality assessments more consistent and traceable.

• Compare responses from different models
• Run A/B tests for prompt changes
• Create shared scoring rubrics

Review open issues and discussions to create a clear work queue. Record the five highest-priority items, suggested labels, possible duplicates, and cases needing human judgment in a state file for future reviews.

• Prioritizing a backlog of open issues
• Finding possible duplicate reports
• Preparing label suggestions

Record how a legal matter ended, its final cost, differences from the original risk estimate, and lessons learned. Close active tracking while preserving the matter’s files and history for future reference.

• Recording a settlement or judgment
• Comparing final costs with initial estimates
• Preserving lessons from a completed matter

Design and run bounded procedures in environments where current conditions are uncertain. The skill separates agent judgment from precise tool actions, verifies each effect, and records checkpoints so interrupted work can resume from observed evidence.

• Designing procedures for environments with varying conditions
• Resuming interrupted operations from verified evidence
• Deciding whether an agent or ordinary code should control a procedure

Claude skill that turns Claude into a Connecticut-specific divorce planner — nine operating modes from pre-flight intake to post-judgment modification, modeled on Untangle.us's feature surface and grounded in C.G.S. Title 46b, Practice Book Chapter 25, and the 2026-08-01 CCSG schedule. Covers eligibility triage (nonadversarial under § 46b-44a vs standard), financial affidavit (JD-FM-6), child support (JD-FM-220 / CCSG-1 / 1A), alimony (§ 46b-82 fourteen factors), parenting plan (with GAL/AMC escalation under JD-FM-224), settlement agreement (JD-FM-172, TCJA-aware), filing packet (marshal 12-day rule, $360 + $50 fees, JD-FM-75 waiver), and post-judgment motion practice. Hard UPL gate: refuses non-CT, domestic violence (refers CTCADV 1-888-774-2900), hidden assets, courtroom advocacy. Heppner-aware: AI prompts are not privileged. First family-law skill in the Lawvable registry.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Expert blueprint for rhythm games including audio synchronization (BPM conductor, latency compensation with AudioServer.get_time_since_last_mix), note highways (scroll speed, timing windows), judgment systems (Perfect/Great/Good/Bad/Miss), scoring with combo multipliers, input processing (lane-based, hold note detection), and chart/beatmap loading. Based on DDR/osu!/Beat Saber research. Trigger keywords: rhythm_game, audio_sync, timing_judgment, note_highway, combo_system, BPM_conductor, latency_compensation.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Expert blueprint for rhythm games including audio synchronization (BPM conductor, latency compensation with AudioServer.get_time_since_last_mix), note highways (scroll speed, timing windows), judgment systems (Perfect/Great/Good/Bad/Miss), scoring with combo multipliers, input processing (lane-based, hold note detection), and chart/beatmap loading. Based on DDR/osu!/Beat Saber research. Trigger keywords: rhythm_game, audio_sync, timing_judgment, note_highway, combo_system, BPM_conductor, latency_compensation.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Decision rubric for when an LM agent should write-and-run code (Program-of-Thought / code interpreter) versus reason in natural language: classify each step as deterministic- computable (emit + execute code, feed the result back) vs judgment (stay in prose). Use when designing or debugging an agent step that does arithmetic/parsing/data transforms, when prose reasoning hallucinates a computation (under-coding), or when a sandbox round- trip is wasted on a judgment task (over-coding). Search keywords: code interpreter, agent does math wrong, calculator hallucination, when to run code vs reason, program of thought, PoT, tool vs reasoning.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Evidence-first expert knowledge handoff skill. Use when a founder, senior engineer, salesperson, support lead, consultant, or other domain expert is leaving, changing roles, or needs their judgment made reusable. It turns consented documents, chat, meeting notes, interviews, and explicit facts into a traceable handoff package. Trigger on requests such as: "capture this expert's judgment", "prepare a departure handoff", "make an onboarding mentor", "extract the decision rules", or "把专家经验交接下来".

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

OpenTSC v2.1: Soul/Shell architecture for interpersonal intelligence. Local, offline-first, with event graphs, judgment engine (K7), self-creation (K8), three-layer attributes, calibrated predictions, 11 VSM professions, and a pluggable zvec memory index (semantic search, identity resolution, jieba segmentation, emotion scoring incl. batched+cached LLM) that runs with zero extra deps. Transforms implicit social judgment into explicit, queryable, auditable, evolving intelligence.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when challenging a prevailing analytical judgment, the user asks "what is the opposing case?" / "argue the other side" / "play devil's advocate", or wants an assessment stress-tested before release. Takes the team's own lead judgment and builds the strongest case that it is wrong. A contrarian technique. It does not model what an adversary would do next, which is Red Team Analysis. Formerly /red-team-analysis.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

"Apply dual-process theory to diagnose whether judgments arise from fast intuitive (System 1) or slow analytical (System 2) processing and identify resulting cognitive biases. Use this skill when the user needs to explain why quick decisions go wrong, design choice architectures that account for cognitive defaults, audit decision processes for heuristic errors, or when they ask 'why do people misjudge probability', 'how to reduce snap-judgment errors', or 'when does intuition fail'.".

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of an Electrical and Electronic Equipment Assembler — inspecting a solder joint against the specific IPC/J-STD workmanship standard criteria rather than personal visual judgment, following ESD precautions for every component handled since damage is invisible at the time it occurs, verifying a crimped connection with a pull test rather than visual inspection alone, or treating a single suspected cold joint as a potential complete failure point rather than a minor defect.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Use when a task needs the judgment of a Bioinformatics Scientist — designing a differential-expression or GWAS analysis with correct multiple-testing correction, calling and triaging variants from NGS data using genotype-likelihood confidence rather than raw allele counts, interpreting a BLAST/DIAMOND homology search, choosing or building a genomics pipeline (aligner, caller, normalization method) for a specific data-generating process, or judging whether a computational-biology analysis's statistical design actually supports the biological claim being made. Distinct from a bioinformatics-technician (executes and QC-gates an established pipeline someone else designed) and a data-scientist (general product/experimentation judgment, not genomics-specific statistics) — this role owns which method and statistical model a genomics question requires, and why.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Drafts post-judgment motions for attorneys' fees using the lodestar method. Covers prevailing party analysis, rate justification, hours documentation, billing judgment, lodestar enhancements, and supporting declarations. Trigger when user needs a fee motion, fee petition, lodestar calculation, or post-trial fee application.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.