267 件（lawve-ai のリポジトリ） ・ 人気順
概要と使いどころ
Pre-flight privilege and work-product check for legal AI prompts. Use when the user is about to send legal content to a third-party AI surface (ChatGPT, Claude.ai, Copilot, Gemini, etc.) and wants to know whether the prompt risks blowing attorney-client privilege or work-product protection. Returns a SAFE/CAUTION/STOP band with cited factors, a discovery-impact line, and a redacted-safe rewrite.
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。
>Ce skill donne accès à l'API de judilibre. Vous formulez votre demande en français, il interroge la base Judlibre et renvoie les réponses. Attention le skill ne fonctionne que si des domaines supplémentaires sont utilisés et que l'utilisateur a rentré sa propre clé Judlibre. Ce skill et son auteur n'ont aucun lien avec la Cour de cassation ou Judilibre
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。
Performance scorecard design, post-matter feedback collection, QBR preparation, and firm comparison for in-house legal ops teams evaluating outside counsel. Design a scorecard framework calibrated to your team's maturity level. Produce post-matter feedback forms for supervising attorneys to complete at matter close. Prepare a QBR pack with agenda, data summary, and talking points for structured business reviews. Produce a side-by-side firm comparison for panel decision-making. Trigger on: 'design a performance scorecard', 'how do we evaluate our firms', 'build us a scorecard', 'post-matter feedback form', 'feedback at matter close', 'collect feedback on the firm', 'QBR', 'quarterly business review', 'prep for the firm review', 'what should I raise with the partner', 'compare the firms', 'which firm is performing better', 'rank our panel', 'firm performance data', 'scorecard framework', 'evaluate outside counsel', 'annual firm review', 'how are our firms performing'.
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。
Apply elite legal writing techniques drawn from Justice Kagan, Boies & Olson, and other top advocates to any legal document — briefs, submissions, letters, opinions, memos, or persuasive correspondence. This skill covers both prose craft (clarity, examples, parallel construction, voice, quoting) and architectural strategy (argument sequencing, framing, openings, endings). Use this skill whenever the user asks you to draft, edit, or improve legal writing and wants it to be genuinely persuasive — not just correct. Also trigger when the user mentions 'make it more persuasive', 'sharpen this', 'strengthen the argument', 'rewrite this section', 'punch it up', 'legal writing', 'draft a brief', 'draft a submission', 'write like a top advocate', or asks you to improve the rhetoric, flow, or force of any legal document. This skill complements the larissa-legal-voice skill (which handles tone and personal voice) by adding the persuasive technique layer on top.
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。
Toolkit for comprehensive PDF reading, reviwing, and creation with visual quality control. Use to work with PDFs (.pdf files) for: (1) Reading or extracting content from existing PDFs, (2) Creating new PDF documents with professional formatting, (3) Generating reports, documents, or layouts that require precise typography and design, or any other PDF reading or generation tasks.
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。
Review contracts against your organization's negotiation playbook, flagging deviations and generating redline suggestions. Use when reviewing vendor contracts, customer agreements, or any commercial agreement where you need clause-by-clause analysis against standard positions.
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。
Read, search, and download emails and attachments from Microsoft Outlook via OAuth2. Use when the user asks to (1) check, read, or fetch emails or messages from Outlook, (2) search emails by keyword, sender, or subject, (3) download email attachments such as contracts, NDAs, or documents, (4) chain email content into other skills (e.g. "read the latest email from X and review the attached NDA"), or (5) any task involving Microsoft Outlook, Office 365, or Exchange email access.
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。
Reviews outside counsel invoices and related billing data for an in-house legal department, including LEDES or e-billing exports, OCGs, approved rates, discounts, budgets, AFAs, and staffing rules. Starts with internal comparisons before bringing in external data. Produces invoice review findings, MBR/QBR scorecards, dispute logs, and management reports. For demonstration purposes only and not professional 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。
Search and cite French case law and statutes with the LibreJustice MCP tools. Use whenever the user asks about French or European court decisions (Cour de cassation, Conseil d'État, cours d'appel, TJ/TA, CNDA, Conseil constitutionnel, CNIL, CEDH, CJUE), needs authorities for a brief, requête, référé or consultation, wants to check how courts rule on an issue, needs counts of decisions on a point, or asks what a code article says at a given date, even if they never mention LibreJustice.
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。
Panel structure design, firm selection criteria, right-sourcing analysis, and coverage gap assessment for in-house legal teams. Build panel frameworks from scratch or formalise existing informal arrangements. Define weighted selection criteria for firm evaluation. Run right-sourcing analysis (ABC tiering) to identify work sent to expensive providers that doesn't require that level of resource. Assess existing panels for practice area, geographic, and capability gaps. Trigger on: 'design our panel', 'how many firms do we need', 'panel structure', 'firm selection criteria', 'which firms should we use', 'right-sourcing', 'are we sending work to the right firms', 'panel gaps', 'too many firms', 'consolidate our panel', 'we need a firm for', 'preferred provider', 'panel tiers', 'do we need BigLaw for this', 'convergence', 'D&I panel targets', 'how do we choose firms'.
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。
Adversarial premortem for England & Wales civil litigation - builds the strongest version of a case, then attacks it from four angles to find where it loses before opposing counsel does. Runs an adversarial premortem on a UK litigation matter. Builds the strongest version of the case, then attacks it from four angles — procedural, substantive, evidentiary, strategic — to find where it actually loses. Returns a ranked stress-test brief: failure scenarios, evidence inconsistencies, blind spots, mitigations, and one brutal one-sentence verdict. Use before issue, before settlement negotiations, before a litigation-funder pitch, or before deciding whether to take a case.
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 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
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 whenever a lawyer or mediator needs help analyzing a dispute for mediation purposes. This includes: reviewing case materials (pleadings, contracts, correspondence, evidence) to identify issues in dispute, summarizing each party's position and interests, conducting legal analysis of the key issues, proposing mediation strategies or settlement directions, and preparing for mediation sessions. Trigger this skill when the user mentions 'mediation', 'dispute analysis', 'settlement', 'dispute resolution', 'identify issues in dispute', 'party positions', 'mediation brief', 'case analysis for mediation', 'ADR', 'mediation preparation', 'caucus strategy', 'settlement options', or any request to analyze a conflict between two or more parties with the goal of finding resolution. Also trigger when the user uploads case files and asks for a structured breakdown of who wants what, what the core disagreements are, or how the case might settle. Even if the user doesn't explicitly say 'mediation', trigger when the context involves analyzing opposing positions in a dispute with a resolution-oriented (rather than litigation-oriented) goal.
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 New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) advisor for NZ government agencies and their supply chains. Use for NZISM control guidance, gap analysis, agency security obligations, classification framework (Unclassified through Top Secret), security risk management, system certification, and GCSB/NCSC NZ compliance. Triggers on: NZISM controls, NZ government security, GCSB compliance, agency cybersecurity obligations, NZ classification markings, Restricted/Confidential/Secret system scoping, agency security policies, third-party supplier security, Certification and Accreditation (C&A), and any question about NZ government information security requirements or the NZISM framework.
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。
Guide pour la rédaction de notifications de licenciement conformes au droit du travail français. Utiliser ce skill quand l'utilisateur demande de rédiger, préparer, créer ou éditer une lettre de notification de licenciement, notamment pour faute grave, faute lourde ou motif personnel. Le skill guide la collecte d'informations précises et la rédaction d'une notification juridiquement solide avec tous les éléments obligatoires du droit français.
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。
Act as experienced opposing counsel to attack, undermine, and expose weaknesses in a legal argument, submission, witness statement, or structured reasoning. Produces a six-part adversarial analysis: 1. A core theory of attack identifying the single most effective way to defeat the argument; 2. A reconstructed version of the opposing argument stripped of rhetoric to expose its fragility; 3. Primary lines of attack grouped by category (legal misstatement, evidential gaps, causation failures, internal inconsistency, over-reliance on assertion, procedural weakness); 4. An "if I were the judge" section showing how a sceptical tribunal would dismantle the argument; 5. Surgical strikes - 3 to 5 high-impact points ready for oral submissions; and 6. An analysis of what the argument is trying to hide. Written in formal, adversarial British English for a legally trained audience.
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。
La compétence Normalisation juridique FR nettoie un document Word rédigé en français juridique. Elle distingue deux régimes : les corrections déterministes (apostrophes courbes, guillemets français, espaces insécables, insécables des références — art. 1240, n° 21-12.345, 50 % —, ordinaux 1ère → 1re, ligatures œ, la loi dispose et non stipule, anglicismes-calques), appliquées directement ; et les réécritures de jugement (virgule avant « et », ternaires creux, formules emphatiques, harmonisations), posées en révisions Word soumises à votre acceptation. Chaque changement est consigné et restitué en tableau récapitulatif : on revient en arrière mot à mot — « défais 3, 7-10 ». La normalisation des citations reste purement formelle. Fonctionne en Cowork ou sur fichier Word.
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。
Génération de sujets d'entraînement complets pour l'épreuve de NOTE DE SYNTHÈSE (5 heures, coefficient 3) de l'examen d'accès au CRFPA : choix du sujet, dossier documentaire de 16 à 20 documents assemblé à partir de sources réelles vérifiées (textes, jurisprudence, travaux parlementaires, doctrine) avec contrôle du verbatim, puis grille de notation au modèle de la Commission nationale (résumé de chaque document, problématique, thèmes cotés sur 20, plan). Livraison en deux fichiers .docx distincts, le sujet et la grille. Si l'utilisateur n'impose pas de sujet, en chercher un dans l'actualité juridique. Mode aveugle pour l'étudiant qui compose sans rien voir du corrigé. Déclencher dès que l'utilisateur demande un sujet de note de synthèse, un dossier documentaire, une note de synthèse blanche, un entraînement à l'épreuve de 5 heures du CRFPA ou de l'IEJ, ou une grille de note de synthèse. NE PAS déclencher pour les épreuves de 3 heures (sujet-crfpa-toutes-matieres) ni pour la correction de copies.
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。
Prepare a lawyer for an adversarial proceeding the way Neal Katyal's "Harvey" prepared him for the SCOTUS tariffs argument: profile the tribunal from their prior opinions and questions, predict the specific questions you will face, map narrow "escape routes" each judge can walk through without abandoning prior commitments, and spar adversarially until only the strongest answers survive. The model is the sparring partner. The human still wins the case. Use when: preparing for oral argument, appellate argument, motion hearing, evidentiary hearing, deposition (taking or defending), arbitration, mediation, or any proceeding where a known decision-maker will fire questions at you in real time. Also useful for stress-testing a brief before filing. Proactively suggest when: the user mentions an upcoming hearing/argument with named judges or arbitrators, drafts a brief and wants it pressure-tested, asks "what will Justice X / Judge Y ask me," or talks about preparing for a specific bench.
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。
Post-hoc verification and trust audit of AI-generated factual and interpretive claims. Classifies claims by type and salience, routes them to domain-appropriate sources, scores trustworthiness on a tiered scale with an Interpolated verdict for plausible-but-unsupported detail, and assesses rhetorical fairness on interpretive claims. Designed for clinical-negligence and healthcare-law practice in England and Wales, with general applicability beyond.
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。
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.
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 ISO 27001 compliance assistant for security and compliance teams. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO 27001 or ISO/IEC 27001, including any of the following: gap analysis, auditing, compliance assessments, control checklists, policy writing, document generation, Statement of Applicability (SoA), risk assessment, risk registers, risk treatment plans, Annex A controls, ISMS implementation, clause requirements, certification readiness, transitioning from 2013 to 2022, control implementation guidance, incident response policies, access control policies, supplier security, or any information security management system (ISMS) topic. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "skill" — any ISO 27001 or ISMS question should use this skill.
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 Australian Information Security Manual (ISM) advisor for government entities and their supply chains. Use for ISM control selection, gap analysis, system authorisation, IRAP assessment preparation, security documentation, and ASD compliance. Triggers on: ISM controls, ASD compliance, IRAP assessment, PROTECTED system scoping, Essential Eight vs ISM, system authorisation, NC/OS/ PROTECTED/SECRET/TOP SECRET classification markings, security objectives, ISM guidelines or chapters, control applicability markings, cybersecurity documentation for Australian government, and any question about the ASD Information Security Manual framework or Australian government cybersecurity obligations.
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。
Compliant, retrieval-grounded research over investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) awards and decisions. Use when the user asks about ICSID / investment-treaty arbitration cases, awards, or doctrines (fair and equitable treatment, expropriation, jurisdiction, costs, annulment, etc.) and wants answers grounded in the actual document text with pinpoint citations. Identifies the correct document on the case page, confirms it against the PDF's own first pages, retrieves primary documents on demand from ICSID, PCA, etc., never scrapes or hosts a corpus in violation of applicable terms, and cites only retrieved text.
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。