「dig」の検索結果

EU NIS2 Directive (Directive (EU) 2022/2555) compliance advisor for essential and important entities: entity classification, Art. 21 risk management measures, Art. 23 incident reporting timelines (24h/72h/1 month), Art. 20 governance obligations, supply chain security (Art. 21(2)(d); coordinated risk assessments Art. 22), gap assessments, policy drafting, ISO 27001 alignment, and penalty exposure analysis. Also covers Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, the technical/methodological sub-requirements for Art. 21(2) and the significant-incident thresholds binding on DNS/cloud/data-centre/MSP/MSSP/trust-service and other digital entities. Use for NIS2 readiness, transposition questions, ENISA technical implementation guidance, significant-incident thresholds, supervisory differences between essential and important entities, and cross-border coordination.

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。

Modélise le raisonnement juridique d'un magistrat français pour l'analyse de dossiers civils. Utiliser ce skill pour analyser un litige et identifier les questions juridiques, construire un raisonnement juridique structuré (syllogisme), rédiger une motivation de jugement civil, rechercher la jurisprudence et les textes applicables via Judilibre et Légifrance, qualifier juridiquement des faits et actes, distinguer prétentions, moyens et arguments. Basé sur les Fiches méthodologiques de rédaction du jugement civil (ENM/Cour de cassation, 2023).

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 or review a DPDPA-compliant consent notice under India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and DPDPA Rules, 2025. Provide basic details about your business and this skill handles the rest - building a notice tailored to your operations, with all required sections, granular consent boxes, and internal notes for your team. If you have an existing notice or privacy policy that needs to comply with DPDPA, this skill revises it too, flagging key gaps and changes made.

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。

Asistente jurídico experto en derecho chileno. Úsalo cuando el usuario haga consultas sobre normativa, códigos, procedimientos o jurisprudencia de Chile y necesite respuestas fundamentadas con cita de ley y artículo y una fuente verificable (BCN). No usar para derecho de otros países ni como reemplazo de asesoría legal formal. Funciona SIN base de datos externa: responde con el conocimiento del modelo, por lo que debe marcar toda incertidumbre y remitir a la fuente oficial para verificación.

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。

GDPR Legitimate Interest Assessment (LIA) — Guided assessment for Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR using the EDPB three-step test. Based on EDPB Guidelines 1/2024, EDPB Opinion 28/2024 (AI models), the OSS Case Digest on Legitimate Interest (McIntyre 2026), CNIL AI guidance (June 2025), ICO guidance, and key CJEU case law. Use when: (1) user needs to assess whether legitimate interest is appropriate, (2) user asks about Art. 6(1)(f), "Interessenabwägung", "berechtigtes Interesse", "balancing test", or "LIA", (3) user wants to document a legitimate interest assessment, (4) user mentions the three-step test, (5) user evaluates necessity or proportionality under Art. 6(1)(f), (6) user discusses direct marketing, fraud prevention, IT security, employee monitoring, AI training, web scraping, or credit checks in context of legal basis, (7) user handles a right to object (Art. 21), (8) user asks about children's data, profiling, or cross-border data sharing under legitimate interest, (9) user compares legitimate interest against other legal bases. Do NOT use for: consent assessments (Art. 6(1)(a)), contract performance (Art. 6(1)(b)), DPIA workflows, or pure ePrivacy/cookie compliance questions — though the skill does address the ePrivacy/GDPR overlap where relevant.

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 India Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about the DPDPA, DPDP Act, DPDP Rules 2025, India data privacy law, Data Fiduciary obligations, Data Principal rights, Significant Data Fiduciary, Data Protection Board of India, consent under DPDPA, notice requirements, breach notification India, children's data India, cross-border data transfer India, India privacy compliance, DPDPA gap analysis, DPDPA vs GDPR, or any obligation under India's personal data protection framework. Also trigger for: "Section 6 consent", "Section 7 legitimate uses", "Section 9 children's data", "Section 10 SDF", "Section 16 cross-border", "Rule 6 breach notification", "Rule 13 SDF obligations", "Data Protection Board complaint", "verifiable parental consent India", "DPDPA compliance roadmap", or "India privacy law global company".

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。

Condense a scholarly legal article by moving nonessential detail from the body into substantive footnotes while preserving every word and keeping the argument self-sufficient. Handles Markdown and Word (.docx), integrates moved material with existing notes, measures a user-specified relegation fraction (25% by default), and delivers a move-by-move memo. Use when asked to "push detail into footnotes," "relegate to footnotes," "footnote the caveats," "move the digressions down," or tighten a dense draft without deleting content. Word output requires file access plus document-conversion and rendering support; when those capabilities are unavailable, deliver Markdown and the memo or ask for a convertible source.

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。

Les LLM écrivent du juridique qui ressemble à du juridique sans en être. Formules creuses, attributions vagues, hedging systématique, latin décoratif : un praticien repère ces tics en trois lignes. Un juge aussi. LawyerScrib est un skill pour Claude Code et Cursor qui nettoie ces traces. Il scanne 17 patterns typiques de l'écriture IA appliquée au droit français (conclusions, consultations, notes, mails, actes) et réécrit chaque passage pour retrouver le ton d'un avocat qui argumente, pas d'un modèle qui rédige. Le résultat : un texte engagé, précis, avec des références sourcées et une position claire. Pas un texte neutre qui "reste à disposition pour tout complément".

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。

EU AI Act Knowledge Engine — authoritative regulatory Q&A grounded in 70 official EU source documents (including the 2026 Commission draft guidelines on Art. 6 high-risk classification — general principles, Annex I, Annex III). Answers any question about the AI Act with article-level citations from the full regulation text, Commission guidelines, EDPB/EDPS opinions, codes of practice, harmonised standards, FRIA guides, incident templates, and sector-specific guidance. This skill should be used when the user asks about the "EU AI Act", "AI Act regulation", "Regulation 2024/1689", "KI-Verordnung", asks to "explain an AI Act article", "what does Article X say", "AI Act requirements", "AI Act penalties", "AI Act timeline", "GPAI obligations", "high-risk AI", "prohibited AI practices", "AI Act and GDPR", "fundamental rights impact assessment", "AI Act standards", "AI Act national implementation", "AI literacy", "serious incident reporting", "Digital Omnibus", "AI regulatory sandbox", or any question about EU artificial intelligence regulation. Also triggers on German terms: "KI-Gesetz", "KI-Verordnung", "Hochrisiko-KI", "KI-Kompetenz", "Grundrechte-Folgenabschaetzung", "GPAI-Verhaltenskodex". For assessment workflows that produce a classification decision rather than a knowledge answer, offer to run a structured risk-tier classification in-session.

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。

EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) compliance advisor — risk classification across all four tiers, all 9 prohibited practices (Art. 5, including the nudification/CSAM prohibition from Dec 2, 2026), all 8 Annex III high-risk use case areas, provider and deployer obligations (Arts. 9–17, 26), GPAI model obligations including the July 2025 Code of Practice (Arts. 51–55), conformity assessment and CE marking (Arts. 43–48), EU AI database registration, Art. 50 transparency (chatbots, synthetic media, AI-generated content), governance (AI Office, AI Board), penalties (Art. 99), confirmed phase-in timeline (Digital Omnibus adopted June 29, 2026: Annex III deferred to Dec 2, 2027; Annex I to Aug 2, 2028), and cross-framework mapping to ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF, and GDPR. Use for any EU AI regulation, AI system classification, or AI compliance question. Current as of July 2026. GPAI enforcement powers activate August 2, 2026.

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 EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) advisor for Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 — mandatory cybersecurity and vulnerability handling requirements for all products with digital elements (PDEs) sold in the EU. Use this skill for gap analysis, product classification (Default / Class I / Class II), conformity assessment route selection, CE marking, SBOM requirements, vulnerability and incident reporting to ENISA/CSIRTs, support period obligations, and manufacturer/importer/distributor duties. Trigger for EU CRA, Cyber Resilience Act, PDE compliance, Annex I requirements, SBOM EU, CE marking cybersecurity, or connected product security EU.

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。

Analyzes how multiple regulations interact for a specific product, service, or business model. Identifies where obligations overlap, reinforce, complement, duplicate, or conflict; builds a priority matrix; produces an integrated compliance timeline; and estimates the total compliance burden. Use when (1) scoping a new product or service against the full regulatory landscape before launch, (2) conducting M&A due diligence on a target's multi-regulation exposure, (3) building a strategic compliance roadmap where single-regulation analyses miss the interactions, (4) advising on complex situations where regulations touch the same conduct from different angles, or (5) estimating budget and resourcing for multi-regulation compliance. Primary coverage of EU digital regulation (GDPR, Data Act, AI Act, CRA, NIS2, DORA, DMA, DSA, ePrivacy) and national implementations; the framework extends to any jurisdiction where overlapping regulatory regimes apply to the same activity.

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。

Expert CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, EU 2022/2464) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about CSRD, European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), double materiality assessment, sustainability reporting obligations, ESG disclosure, CSRD scope and thresholds, value chain reporting, XBRL digital tagging, third-party assurance, CSRD gap assessments, CSRD implementation timelines, ESRS E1–E5 environmental standards, ESRS S1–S4 social standards, ESRS G1 governance, CSRD vs GRI/TCFD/SASB alignment, or any EU corporate sustainability reporting question. Trigger even if the user only mentions "ESG reporting Europe", "sustainability disclosure EU", or "non-financial reporting".

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 user asks what the EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) means for their product, whether and when they must report a vulnerability or incident, or what a specific CVE triggers legally. Maps a product with digital elements to CRA scope, product classification, Annex I vulnerability-handling duties, and Article 14 reporting obligations — every legal claim cited from official regulation text fetched live through the Ansvar Gateway MCP connector, joined with live CVE / CISA-KEV / EPSS vulnerability intelligence from the same connector.

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。

Digits roll like an odometer up to the target number — a satisfying stat reveal on view. One or two key numbers per view. Under prefers-reduced-motion the final number shows instantly.

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。

Analyze digital and analog captures from Saleae Logic MSO devices. Decode protocols like UART, SPI, I2C from exported binary files. Use when analyzing logic analyzer captures for CTF challenges, hardware reverse engineering, or protocol decoding.

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。

Build students' capacity to interrogate a historical source before reading — asking who authored it, when, why, and what this means for reliability. Use when students read documents without attending to authorship.

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。

Build students' capacity to place historical documents in their temporal and social context. Use when students read sources without considering what was happening at the time, or know the context but don't deploy 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。

Build students' capacity to read historical documents closely — attending to word choice, tone, and rhetoric as evidence of perspective. Use when students summarise sources without analysing language.

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 complete document-based history lesson using the Reading Like a Historian four-part structure. Use when planning a primary source inquiry lesson or converting a textbook lesson into document-based investigation.

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。

Build students' capacity to compare accounts across multiple historical sources — identifying agreements, contradictions, and gaps. Use when students treat individual documents as complete answers rather than partial perspectives.

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。

Evaluate a teacher-drafted central historical question for its capacity to drive genuine historical inquiry. Use when assessing whether a question will generate real evidence-weighing or produce shallow responses.

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。