「claims」の検索結果

Framework for demonstrating AI capabilities in legal contexts. Provides detailed personas across tenant law, business contracts, startup disputes, employment claims, and consumer protection with progressive complexity scenarios. Use when: (1) Demonstrating AI-powered legal triage or intake systems, (2) Showcasing responsible AI-assisted client interactions, (3) Training staff on appropriate AI use in legal contexts, (4) Creating realistic scenarios for legal tech presentations, (5) Developing educational materials about AI in legal services, or (6) Testing AI-powered legal information systems in controlled environments.

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。

AFA design, scope-to-fee matching, negotiation preparation, health check, and scope dispute assessment for in-house legal ops teams managing outside counsel arrangements. Design fee structures (fixed, capped, collar, blended, phased, success). Assess whether scope supports a proposed AFA. Prepare commercial positions for fee negotiations. Review existing AFAs against delivery data. Assess OOS claims and build dispute response. Trigger on: 'structure the fee', 'move off hourly', 'design an AFA', 'does scope support a fixed fee?', 'negotiate the fee', 'renegotiate the arrangement', 'is our AFA holding?', 'fee health check', 'cap is being approached', 'firm is claiming OOS', 'is this in scope?', 'is this OOS?', 'AI should reduce the cost', 'blended rate vs fixed', 'collar arrangement', 'phased fees'.

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 when verifying build/test/lint before commit, PR, or completion claims. Runs verification pipeline in fresh subagent context with auto-repair. Triggers on /handoff-verify, pre-commit check, build verification, test validation.

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。

Design a source evaluation protocol using lateral reading and credibility checks for digital information. Use when students need to evaluate websites, online sources, or social media claims.

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。

Check an educational practice or task for cultural bias, WEIRD assumptions, and cross-cultural validity. Use when adapting resources for diverse contexts or questioning universal claims.

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。

Design a fact-checking protocol for AI-generated text, extending SIFT with AI-specific adaptations for hallucination detection. Use when students need to verify AI claims and citations.

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。

Design a Funhouse Mirror activity where students use their own domain expertise to detect AI distortions, omissions, and overconfidence. Use when students know a subject well enough to evaluate AI claims about it.

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。

Start (or restart) a local Temps control plane built from this checkout, and the web dev server (`bun dev`) in `<checkout>/web`. Invoke when the user says "start temps", "restart temps", "launch the server", "kill and restart temps", or asks to bring the local server up after backend changes. Ports, database and data dir are allocated PER CHECKOUT (a "slot") so several worktrees/branches run side by side without killing each other or corrupting each other's schema — the first checkout you start in claims slot 0 (the familiar `:8080` / `:3000`); every other worktree gets its own slot and its own `temps_s<N>` database. Uses the `fast` cargo profile (release semantics, no debug symbols, parallel codegen) for quick rebuilds. Pass `split` (e.g. "start temps split", "/start-temps split") to launch the two-process proxy/console topology for testing that feature.

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。

Draft, audit, or minimally revise English- or Chinese-language academic prose to reduce formulaic, vacuous, mechanically repetitive, or process-leaking language while preserving claims, evidence strength, logical relations, manuscript-wide terminology identity, document-level pattern variation, and scholarly register. Use for papers, abstracts, grants, cover letters, and reviewer responses when the user asks to de-AI, humanize, audit AI-like phrasing, or rewrite text without changing meaning. English is primary; Chinese is supported. Not for detector evasion, policy circumvention, pure translation, non-academic copy, or adding facts, citations, examples, or author experiences that the source does not contain.

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 when a leader must review or approve TEXT-based team output before it ships — content briefs checked for angle, pillar, and CTA, ad copy and creative checked for substantiated claims, on-brand tone, a hook inside the first 125 characters, and platform policy, ending in an Approve, Revise, or Redo verdict with point-by-point feedback. Trigger on 'review this brief', 'approve the ad copy', 'check ads before launch', 'review team output', 'is this good enough to publish', 'my team keeps sending me drafts'. Not for — reviewing a visual design, see `47-design-review-global`; evaluating a person over a period, see `65-team-performance-review-global`; writing the copy yourself, see `05-ad-copy-global`.

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 when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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 when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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。

Grilling session that mines the user for fragments — heterogeneous nuggets of writing (claims, vignettes, sharp sentences, half-thoughts) — and appends them to a single document as raw material for a future article. Use when the user wants to develop ideas before imposing structure, or mentions "fragments", "ideate", or "raw material" for writing.

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。

Explain classroom chemistry observations and fictional potion concepts without unverified safety claims. Use for this Bot Generator Bot template; creates drafts or simulations within its declared scope.

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。

Validates defensive controls with paired authorized action and observation evidence, distinguishing blocked, prevented, detected, responded, and telemetry-gap outcomes. Use for purple-team validation design or offline fixture review; not unsanctioned testing or production efficacy claims.

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。

Performs quality control, citation validation, and fact-checking before human review. Use after research is complete to verify all sources and claims before production.

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。

Conducts investigative-grade research with primary source analysis, cross-verification, and trial-level depth. Use when an album needs factual research, source material, or verification of claims.

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 code reviewer for Bug Hunter. Rigorously challenges each reported bug to determine if it's real or a false positive. Uses doc-lookup (Context Hub + Context7) to verify framework claims before disproval. The immune system that kills false positives.

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 when `paper-review` has claims plus evidence gaps and needs the final referee-style report.

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 when a review workspace has manuscript text and needs a traceable claim ledger.

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。

Rewrite `outline/claim_evidence_matrix.md` as a projection/index of evidence packs (NO PROSE), so claims/axes are driven by `outline/evidence_drafts.jsonl` rather than outline placeholders.

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 and rewrite evaluation/numeric claims to ensure they carry minimal protocol context (task + metric + constraint) and avoid underspecified model naming.

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 claims that work is done or shipped against the diff or repo. Use when: asked whether something really got done, even if it looks obvious.

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。

Freshly judge whether a finished change and its claims meet original acceptance: PASS, FAIL or NOT_PROVEN. Use when: asked for a go/no-go, sign-off or independent verdict.

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。