839건 · 관련도순
Build one compact choice card at a genuine mathematical-modeling judgment point. Use before method screening, after a meaningful experiment, or before final claim/freeze approval so the human chooses the trade-off while AI handles mechanical consequences.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Extract and maintain global and method-specific mathematical-model assumptions from the problem frame, active method cards, data profile, and risk probes, while leaving necessity and impact judgments to the human modeler.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Perform a structured maintainer-style PR review for the mariadb-operator repository. Gathers PR context, triages the change, and evaluates correctness, safety, pitfalls, backwards compatibility and code quality against the project conventions documented in AGENTS.md. Use whenever the user mentions a mariadb-operator PR number or URL and wants any kind of judgment on it — "review this PR", "what do you think of #1234", "is this safe to merge", "assess this diff", "take a look at this change" — even if they don't literally say "review".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Initialize a PM Brain — a markdown-native second brain for a product operator (PM, product lead, founder, or anyone accountable for one product or initiative) doing judgment-heavy work with scattered inputs. Detects greenfield vs. migration mode, runs a focused interview, copies the deterministic scaffold into the working directory, populates placeholders from interview answers, runs a self-test, and commits. Use when invoked via `/pm-brain` or when the user asks to set up a PM Brain.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Organize document evidence into auditable competing hypotheses, source-linked observations, an assessment matrix and document-linked discriminating tests. Use for bounded explanatory questions, documents that could resolve uncertainty, rejection history, source provenance, gaps and updates, including a withdrawn or corrected fact and which explanations and earlier judgments it puts back under review; not findings of guilt or predictions about people. Evaluation preview requiring human review.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Verifies UK case-law citations, pinpoint references and quotations against the official public register — The National Archives' Find Case Law — and statutory references against legislation.gov.uk, before a document that cites them is relied on, served or filed. Every check returns a graded verdict: VERIFIED, MISMATCH (the citation resolves to a different case — the classic AI miscitation), NOT ON REGISTER, OUTSIDE COVERAGE (the register cannot answer — absence proves nothing), or UNCHECKABLE (a law-report citation). The grading exists because there are two ways to get this wrong: citing a case that does not exist, and accusing a real case of not existing. Use when asked to check citations, verify a case exists, confirm a quotation is verbatim, check a pinpoint paragraph, audit a draft's authorities, screen a document for hallucinated cases, or check a statutory provision is in force. Not a substitute for reading the judgment: existence is not authority.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
This skill stress-tests a proposed settlement position before an offer goes out or comes back: the assumptions it depends on, your leverage and the opponent’s, the evidential weaknesses, the likely opponent response, and the timing and costs pressures around it. It structures settlement judgment for a better-informed decision; it does not advise whether to settle.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Verification-first methodology for the post-WWII tribunals: the IMT at Nuremberg, the twelve Nuremberg Military Tribunals, and the IMTFE at Tokyo. Citations are verified against the official records (Blue/Green Series, Pritchard-Zaide) and the digital archives (Avalon, Harvard NTP, UVA IMTFE). Guards the four classic traps (IMT vs NMT; Nuremberg vs Tokyo; Charter article numbers; majority judgment vs separate opinions, e.g. the Pal dissent). Research aid, not legal advice. Part of the open-source "Skills for International Justice" library — methodology: github.com/jeannesulzer/international-criminal-tribunals-skills
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
a skill that determines whether a given subject matter qualifies for copyright protection under EU law by applying the Cofemel two-step test (concept of work + originality), grounded in fifteen CJEU judgments (including the most recent Mio/Konektra and Calinescu) and the four EU directive provisions on originality. It argues from one of two positions: pro-rightsholder (establishing that the work is original) or pro-alleged-infringer (contesting work status or originality via the four exclusion grounds — technical function, rule-dictated outcome, sweat of the brow, idea/functionality). It includes sector-specific modules for photography, software/GUI, sporting events, databases, applied art, functional texts, derivative works/critical editions, and multimedia works.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Turn a lawyer's bounded expertise, workflow, review standard, or legal judgment pattern into a safe, inspectable legal AI skill. Use when a user provides legal memos, comments, checklists, negotiation notes, review habits, compliance playbooks, or professional feedback and wants a reusable Lawve-style skill. Do not impersonate the lawyer or claim to reproduce a person; distill only authorized, source-bounded capability.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
EU Digital Regulation Legal Analysis Forge — generates a tailored expert prompt for structured legal analysis of an EU digital-regulation document, optionally executes it in-session, and always produces a plain-English explainer alongside the formal output. Handles Regulations, Directives, Commission Guidelines, EDPB Opinions, CJEU and AG judgments, national DPA decisions, codes of conduct, and draft consultations across the EU digital stack.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Searches the domestic courts of 122 jurisdictions — 153 databases, 49 automated — for extradition and arrest-warrant surrender decisions, each in its own language and vocabulary. Answers the question no commercial database does: how are OTHER executing states treating this requesting state, or this ground? Searching by requesting state localises its name per jurisdiction (AE becomes 'Emiratele Arabe Unite' in Romania, 'Emirati Arabi Uniti' in Italy), so the sweep finds what those courts actually wrote. Every hit passes a relevance gate; every search leaves a dated report, so the research is reconstructable months later. Use when asked what foreign courts have said about surrender to a given state, whether any European court has refused extradition on prison conditions, assurances or Article 3, for comparative extradition research, or to build a foreign-authority section of an extradition argument. Not for domestic case law of the user's own jurisdiction, and never a substitute for reading the judgment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Produces detailed law-school case briefs of United States judicial opinions in a fixed nine-section structure: memory jogger, facts, procedural history, judicial votes, holding, opinion-by-opinion analysis, five future-application hypotheticals, critique, and verified key quotations. Also builds vote tables, cross-case consistency tables, perspective-based critiques, and LaTeX in article, Beamer and casebook-chapter formats. Use whenever someone asks to brief a case, analyse or explain an opinion, summarise a decision for students, generate hypotheticals from a holding, critique a judgment, tabulate how justices voted, or convert case analysis to LaTeX. Triggers on "brief this case", "case brief", "explain the holding", "what did the court hold", "hypotheticals based on", "critique this opinion", "vote table", "Beamer presentation", "chapter brief", and on any reference to a judicial opinion or Supreme Court decision in a teaching context. Requires web search to verify quotations, votes and holdings.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
AI co-counsel for divorce and family-law attorneys — a jurisdiction-portable scaffold spanning the full matter lifecycle. Eight operating modes mirror how a matter actually moves: intake and onboarding, financial disclosure, children and support, property division and QDRO, discovery and document review, drafting, negotiation and mediation prep, and court prep — plus post-judgment modification and enforcement. The methodology is jurisdiction-agnostic: it forces real, verifiable research for every local form, formula, or rule rather than inventing one, handling common-law, community-property, civil-law, and MENA personal-status regimes as variables. Built around one non-negotiable: privilege. It drafts, analyzes, organizes, and pressure-tests. It is not the lawyer.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
When you want to set up an agent loop, cron-scheduled task, or recurring workflow that runs autonomously. Judgment layer on top of Claude Code's ScheduleWakeup, CronCreate, and /loop — or, on other hosts, cron/GitHub Actions plus a headless agent CLI. Picks dynamic pacing, fixed cron, or a one-shot loop; designs idempotent loop bodies; sets bail-out conditions so loops don't run forever. Examples — weekly review pulse, daily brief, hourly metric monitor, periodic vault compile, upstream-check for an adapted skill. Triggers on "/loopify," "set up a loop," "schedule this task," "run this daily," "run this weekly," "cron this," "make this recurring," "automate this on a schedule," "keep this running until X." Part of the -ify trifecta (skillify / toolify / loopify). NOT for authoring a new skill — that's skillify. NOT for adding a tool/integration — that's toolify.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Implement ReasoningBank adaptive learning with AgentDB's 150x faster vector database. Includes trajectory tracking, verdict judgment, memory distillation, and pattern recognition. Use when building self-learning agents, optimizing decision-making, or implementing experience replay systems.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Write, compose, integrate, and improve programs that call Jev, TypeSafe's System One judgment model.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Implement ReasoningBank adaptive learning with AgentDB's 150x faster vector database. Includes trajectory tracking, verdict judgment, memory distillation, and pattern recognition. Use when building self-learning agents, optimizing decision-making, or implementing experience replay systems.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Implement ReasoningBank adaptive learning with AgentDB's 150x faster vector database. Includes trajectory tracking, verdict judgment, memory distillation, and pattern recognition. Use when building self-learning agents, optimizing decision-making, or implementing experience replay systems.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Makes agent reasoning visible, surfaces tradeoffs, and fades help so humans build judgment. Use when reviewing or learning from agent-written code.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Adaptive, targeted web fuzzing - deterministic wordlist selection (wl-pick.sh) plus judgment. Picks the right SecLists list per surface (content/vhost/api/params/artifacts) smallest-first, calibrates filters against soft-404s, recurses, escalates T0 harness -> T1 seclists -> T2 cewl -> T3 app-specific on signal, pivots to hidden-param fuzzing, and detects/handles WAF/Cloudflare/throttle (backoff, origin-bypass, or hard STOP on the DoS tell). Engagement-type aware (ctf loud, pt calibrated, bb stealth). Use for "fuzz", "content discovery", "directory brute", "vhost fuzz", "find hidden params", "which wordlist", "gobuster/ffuf/feroxbuster/cewl/arjun".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Transform an AI agent into a disciplined software development partner with strong judgment, transparent decisions, proportionate verification, and craftsmanship. Use for software implementation, feature work, bug fixing, refactoring, optimization, migrations, and sustained collaboration inside a codebase. Do not use merely because a task involves an AI agent; use a dedicated agent-design skill when the primary problem is agent architecture.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Reconstruct and report long-running or multi-turn research, architecture questions, reviews, decisions, completion results, and status as a clear, self-contained brief. Use when a reader must re-enter earlier context, understand the real question and its relationships, distinguish verified facts from judgment and open evidence, or make a decision without reconstructing the work log. Quote the relevant original user wording before substantive analysis, keep one coherent main line, use spatial diagrams when relationships matter, and finish with an explicit decision boundary and practical next step.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
能力蒸馏工作流——从用户批准的强模型访谈或真实任务轨迹中提取非显然的判断规则，形成可审计的 judgment packet，再交给 skill-audit 和 skill-creator 决定是否落成可加载 skill。当用户说“蒸馏这个模型的判断力”“把这次任务的关键决策固化下来”“模型窗口要关了，保留它在某类场景的判断”时使用。普通流程文档、直接写 SKILL.md、泛化最佳实践或未授权的会话日志扫描不使用本 skill。
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.