スキルを探す

A drafting-and-review copilot for a founders' / co-founders' agreement — the terms fixing equity, vesting, IP, roles, control, deadlock, and departure between cofounders. Jurisdiction-agnostic, anchored on the Delaware C-corp default. Two modes: DRAFT (intake → equity & vesting → clauses → blocker triage → pre-signature check) and REVIEW (audit an existing agreement against an 18-clause checklist and red-flag scan). It handles the highest-dispute terms first-class: the equity split as documented reasoning (not a fake calculator), reverse vesting and the 83(b) clock, present-tense IP assignment (the Stanford v. Roche trap), leaver buyback and dead equity, and the deadlock clause most tools omit. It drafts for the venture, never one founder against another. Not legal advice.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generate templated responses for common legal inquiries and identify when situations require individualized attention. Use when responding to routine legal questions — data subject requests, vendor inquiries, NDA requests, discovery holds — or when managing response templates.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Matter budgeting and ongoing WIP/variance monitoring. Build phase-based fee estimates at matter setup, run bottom-up budgets by jurisdiction or workstream, calculate contingency, and structure AFA arrangements (fixed fee, capped fee, phased fixed fees). Ongoing monitoring: WIP tracking against budget, proportionality assessment (spend vs progress), variance commentary with root cause analysis, forecast-to-complete, realisation monitoring, write-off analysis. Trigger on: 'build a budget', 'fee estimate', 'what will this cost', 'WIP review', 'budget vs actual', 'how are we tracking against budget', 'we're over budget', 'realisation is poor', 'what's our ETC', 'budget for the German workstream', 'model the financial impact of this scope change', 'draft a fee adjustment', 'write-off analysis', 'how much contingency', 'AFA structure', 'fixed fee estimate', 'budget update', 'forecast to complete'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Operational billing execution for legal matters. Monthly bill prep and billing instructions, LC invoice review and disbursement treatment, client billing query responses, cashflow modelling (LC payment obligations vs client receipts), and leverage and burn analysis (staffing mix, predicted total cost, margin trajectory). Trigger on: 'prepare the bill', 'billing instruction', 'end of month billing', 'LC invoice', 'local counsel invoice', 'pass through as disbursement', 'client querying the invoice', 'billing dispute', 'cashflow gap', 'when will we get paid', 'LC payment due', 'leverage analysis', 'staffing mix', 'predicted total cost', 'burn rate by grade', 'are we on track', 'what will this matter cost'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

When your bar comes asking "show me how you billed AI-assisted work" — and ABA 512, Florida 24-1, California, New York, and DC all have opinions out — you need an artifact that survives review. billable-time produces it. From your Claude Code session logs, it drafts reviewable time entries plus a printable HTML audit packet with: SHA-256 chain of evidence (source files + matter.yml + active disclosure pack + verifiable artifact self-hash), attorney identity and signature block, a bar-opinion disclosure pack with starter language for five jurisdictions, and content-aware deterministic narratives derived from filename and tool shape — never from prompt text by default. The tool refuses to bill on its own. --strict mode refuses to ship the artifact if any audit invariant fails (broad routes, missing attorney, missing/unverified disclosure). Comes as a Node CLI and a self-contained browser version (no backend; JSONL never leaves the page). 15 invariant tests verify the contract. AGPL-3.0.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Orientação completa sobre conformidade com regulamentações do Banco Central do Brasil: Resolução CMN nº 4.893/2021 (Política de Segurança Cibernética), Resolução BCB nº 85/2021 (GRSIC), Open Finance Brasil (Resoluções BCB nº 32/2020 e atualizações), e demais normas prudenciais do BACEN. Cobre elaboração e revisão de Política de Segurança Cibernética, Plano de Ação e Resposta a Incidentes (PARI), Gestão de Riscos de Serviços de Informação e Comunicação (GRSIC), consentimento e compartilhamento de dados no Open Finance, requisitos de API, gestão de terceiros (outsourcing) e sanções do BACEN. Triggers: Bacen, Banco Central, CMN 4.893, Resolução 4.893, segurança cibernética bancária, PARI, GRSIC, Open Finance, Open Banking, compartilhamento de dados financeiros, consentimento Open Finance, API financeira, outsourcing bancário, risco cibernético, incidente cibernético banco, LGPD financeira, fintech compliance, instituição financeira, DICT, Pix segurança.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit de conformité RGPD complet d'un site internet. Réalise une observation systématique du site selon une checklist de 10 sections (mentions légales, hébergeur, formulaires, newsletter, politique de confidentialité, cookies et bandeau, mots de passe, trackers et mesure d'audience, sous-traitants et transferts hors UE, accessibilité du recueil des droits) plus une annexe 22 items reproduisant les exigences des articles 13 et 14 RGPD. Produit un rapport structuré avec niveau de conformité global, points bloquants (risque 3), points de vigilance (risque 2), recommandations prioritaires et notes techniques. Le skill est tool-agnostique : il fonctionne avec un outil de navigation automatique (Claude in Chrome, Cowork ou équivalent) ou en mode dégradé copier-coller. Triggers : "audit RGPD site", "audit site internet", "vérifie ce site", "scanne ce site", "audit conformité site", "audite la conformité de [URL]", "audit cookies site", "audit politique de confidentialité site".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Assistant juridique expert en droit français. Recherches, consultations, rédaction d'actes, contre-argumentaires, analyses de contrats et de pièces, veille, vérification et harmonisation de références. Produit des documents Word (computer use) ou des réponses conversationnelles structurées. MCP : OpenLegi, Themia, LegalDataHunter. Déclencher pour toute question juridique, tout concept de droit français (contrat, responsabilité, jurisprudence, code civil, tribunal, indemnisation), toute question sur le droit de l'UE, la CJUE ou la CEDH, et toute demande de vérification ou harmonisation de références bibliographiques juridiques.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Rédaction d'assignations en référé devant le tribunal de commerce ou des activités économiques pour le recouvrement de créances commerciales. Utiliser ce skill quand l'utilisateur demande de rédiger, préparer ou créer une assignation en référé pour obtenir le paiement d'une créance impayée (factures, prestations de services, ventes de marchandises, etc.) lorsque le débiteur n'a pas honoré ses obligations de paiement et qu'il n'existe pas de contestation sérieuse.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Rédaction d'assignations en référé devant le tribunal de commerce ou des activités économiques pour le droit de communication d'un associé. Utiliser ce skill quand l'utilisateur demande de rédiger, préparer ou créer une assignation en référé fondée sur l'article L. 238-1 du code de commerce pour obtenir la communication forcée de documents sociaux (comptes annuels, rapports de gestion, PV d'assemblées, etc.) lorsqu'un dirigeant refuse ou fait obstruction à la communication de ces documents à un associé.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Argentine Supreme Court citation network analysis using JurisRank — a peer-reviewed PageRank algorithm with temporal decay for measuring jurisprudential authority. Ranks precedents by citation influence, traces doctrinal evolution, and detects constitutional drift. Published methodology: JCLLT (DOI: 10.47852/bonviewJCLLT62027951). Activate with: which cases to cite, rank precedents, case authority, doctrinal evolution, Argentine Supreme Court, CSJN jurisprudence, citation network, leading case, legal research Argentina.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Archéologie des sources juridiques anciennes via Gallica (BNF, API stables, sans clé) : débats parlementaires du JO depuis 1871 (genèse des lois de la IIIe République), notes d'arrêt et doctrine d'origine dans les recueils Sirey et Dalloz, Bulletins civil et criminel anciens, Recueil Lebon, JO Lois et décrets 1881-2015, thèses et traités du XIXe-début XXe, Gazette des tribunaux, Bulletin de l'Inspection du travail. Déclencher dès que l'utilisateur cherche l'origine historique d'un texte, d'un concept ou d'une jurisprudence : « débats de la loi de 1884 », « note de Josserand », « que disait la doctrine en 1900 », « première apparition de la notion de… », « généalogie / histoire de l'article… », « arrêt ancien », « thèse d'avant-guerre », « Gallica », « BNF », ou toute recherche juridique antérieure aux bases modernes (Légifrance ne remonte pas avant l'époque contemporaine, Judilibre non plus). Déclencher aussi en COMPLÉMENT de travaux-preparatoires quand la loi étudiée est antérieure à 1958.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Analyse systématique d'un Data Processing Agreement (DPA) au regard de l'article 28 RGPD, des lignes directrices EDPB 07/2020 et 02/2024, des CCT 2021 (décision d'exécution 2021/914), des recommandations EDPB 01/2020 (mesures supplémentaires post-Schrems II), et du Règlement (UE) 2024/1689 (Règlement IA). Produit un rapport structuré clause par clause (18 clauses : 13 obligatoires + 5 complémentaires) avec diagnostic 🟢/🟡/🔴, remédiations prêtes à insérer, analyse détaillée des transferts internationaux, vérification Règlement IA, et questions à poser au fournisseur. Triggers : "analyse de DPA", "audit DPA", "vérifier un DPA", "DPA fournisseur", "data processing agreement", "art. 28 RGPD", "sous-traitant RGPD", "négociation DPA", "review DPA", "conformité contrat sous-traitance".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Adversarially stress-tests a legal text — a contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — for interpretive ambiguity: it finds the seams where the people governed by it will later disagree about what it means and turns each into a concrete dispute scenario with both sides' arguments, the likely outcome, and a fix. Use it whenever someone wants to pressure-test, red-team, audit, or find weak spots, loopholes, gaps, ambiguities, or drafting problems in a legal document; whenever a drafter wants to tighten a contract, statute, regulation, or opinion before it issues; whenever a litigator wants to mine an opinion or contract for arguments; or whenever someone hands over a legal text and asks where it will be fought over or for issue-spotting. Trigger it for contract review, statutory-ambiguity analysis, judicial-opinion scope analysis, and drafting QA — even if the user never says "stress-test" or "ambiguity."

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Turn an interpretive-ambiguity audit of a legal text — contract, statute, regulation, or judicial opinion — into a polished deliverable. Produces a multi-page website (default), a single-page interactive site, a Microsoft Word document, a PowerPoint deck, or a LaTeX/PDF. Use whenever a user has a stress-test result, ambiguity audit, or "where will this be litigated" scenarios and wants to publish, present, or share them. Triggers on "publish the audit," "make a report from this," "turn this into a website / deck / brief / Word doc," "make a Netlify site," "build slides of these ambiguities," "render the scenarios," "package this stress test," "produce a LaTeX version," and similar. Pairs with the ambiguity-stress-test skill (the underlying analysis) but works on any structured or semi-structured ambiguity analysis. Visual design is opinionated but the user can override colors, fonts, and brand label. Most formats need Python and a writable filesystem; single-file HTML works where the host has neither.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when the user wants an AI governance, legal-risk, privacy, compliance, procurement, or vendor-risk review of an internal AI use case, an AI product feature, an LLM workflow, or a third-party AI vendor. The skill asks intake and clarifying questions first when facts or evidence are missing, identifies required documentation and missing evidence, maps the use case to AI governance frameworks and applicable legal domains, and produces a preliminary or final governance review with scorecards, findings, owners, remediation actions, and follow-up questions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Complete sanctions and export control analysis tool — individual designations, sectoral sanctions, dual-use goods, payment systems (SWIFT/USD), and extraterritorial regimes (EAR/ITAR/ FDPR US, ECL China). Triggers: "is X sanctioned?", "can I do business with X?", "can I sell Y to Z?", "pétrole Russie", "biens à double usage", "gel des avoirs", "sanctions internationales", "liste OFAC", "liste UE", "double usage", "embargo", "licence d'exportation", "SWIFT", "paiement en dollars", "US goods", "FDPR", "EAR", "ITAR", "BIS", "ECL chine", "no re-export clause", "sanctions sectorielles", "puis-je travailler avec X?", or any transaction involving a foreign person, product, sector, destination country, or payment in USD/EUR. Always adapt to user profile. Always run for any sanctions or export control query — even vague or exploratory ones.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Collaboration platform configuration methodology for legal matter sites. Site architecture, workflow identification, dashboard design, data quality governance, and user adoption for SharePoint, Teams, and equivalent platforms. M365 is the reference implementation — outputs are platform-agnostic enough to brief IT or build simple automations without becoming a Power Automate manual. Use when setting up a matter site, identifying workflows to automate, designing reporting dashboards, managing platform data quality, or driving user adoption. Trigger on: 'set up the matter site', 'configure SharePoint', 'build a dashboard', 'what should we automate', 'brief IT on this workflow', 'nobody is using the platform', 'data quality is poor', 'set up Teams channel', 'matter site structure', 'alerts and notifications', 'user training', 'platform governance', 'status dashboard', 'what workflows can we automate', 'matter site template'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Verification-first methodology for Section I (War Crimes) of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Citations are verified against the Court of BiH, the ICTY/IRMCT archives and OSCE. Distinguishes ICTY-referred (Rule 11 bis) cases from locally-initiated ones; covers Stanković, Janković and the Maktouf lex mitior ruling. Research aid, not legal advice. Part of the open-source "Skills for International Justice" library — methodology: github.com/jeannesulzer/international-criminal-tribunals-skills

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Contract intelligence and contract operations workflow skill for Claude and Codex. Guides the full contract lifecycle review process from intake and playbook normalization through clause review, deviation scoring, negotiation planning, approval routing, QA, and action recommendations. Reviews legal, business, operational, compliance, privacy, security, technology, and AI-related risks across contracts and legal documents. Supports NDAs, SaaS agreements, DPAs, procurement contracts, commercial agreements, contract comparisons, redlines, approval packages, clause research, and drafting. Warning-Comprehensive reviews can consume significant Claude/OpenAI tokens, especially for large agreements, playbooks, exhibits, schedules, and multi-document reviews.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Works out which documents you have to hand over to the other side in a civil case in England & Wales, and builds the formal list. The part it gets right that trips people up is which disclosure regime applies — Practice Direction 57AD (the Disclosure Pilot, now permanent in the Business and Property Courts, with its Models A–E) or standard disclosure under CPR Part 31 everywhere else. It picks the regime, chooses a Model per issue, structures the Disclosure Review Document, and drafts the disclosure certificate for the party to sign personally. Built for litigation juniors, in-house counsel, and small teams without a precedent bank. Use when the user says 'disclosure list', 'PD 57AD', 'Model C', 'extended disclosure', 'List of Documents', 'N265', or needs to work out what must be disclosed.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Expert CMMC 2.0 (Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification) advisor for US defense contractors and subcontractors in the Defense Industrial Base (DIB). Use this skill whenever a user asks about CMMC 2.0, CMMC Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3, DoD cybersecurity compliance, NIST SP 800-171, CUI (Controlled Unclassified Information) protection, System Security Plan (SSP), Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M), C3PAO assessments, DIBCAC audits, self-assessment, SPRS score, or any requirement under DFARS 252.204-7012 or 7021. Also trigger for: "CMMC gap analysis", "CMMC readiness", "FCI protection", "CUI scoping", "CMMC practices", "DoD contract cybersecurity", "defense supply chain security", or "prime contractor flow-down requirements".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audits a website for compliance with Azerbaijan's Law on Personal Data No. 998-IIIQ and, where applicable, EU GDPR plus ePrivacy/cookie consent rules. Inventories the privacy documents present (privacy policy, cookie policy, cookie banner, consent flow, controller and DPO contact, data subject rights channel, cross-border transfer disclosures, AZ operator-registration references) and scores each against the applicable statutory requirements. Produces a dual-layer report: a plain-language traffic-light summary for business owners plus a clause-by-clause findings table with article-level citations for lawyers. Assessment-only — no drafting. Use whenever the user shares a URL or privacy/cookie policy text for an AZ-based or AZ-targeted site; also when the user mentions an .az domain, Law 998, the AZ State Register, ePrivacy, an Art. 27 EU representative, or asks "is my site GDPR compliant", "do I need to register as an operator in Azerbaijan", or "is our cookie banner lawful" — even without the word "audit".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Creates an Agent Authority Charter for enterprise or regulated AI agents before deployment. Use this Skill when a user needs to define what an AI agent is allowed to do, who delegated authority to it, what actions are permitted or prohibited, when human approval is required, what evidence must be preserved, and how the agent can be suspended, revoked, or escalated.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。