This skill should be used for advanced LLM evaluation: LLM-as-judge systems, direct scoring, pairwise comparison, rubric calibration, evaluator bias mitigation, confidence scoring, and automated quality assessment.
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。
2,383 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
This skill should be used for advanced LLM evaluation: LLM-as-judge systems, direct scoring, pairwise comparison, rubric calibration, evaluator bias mitigation, confidence scoring, and automated quality assessment.
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。
Triage an incoming verdaccio/verdaccio GitHub issue against the codebase, the affected release line, and related issues, then choose the labels from the repository's existing taxonomy. Use whenever the user asks to triage, classify, assess, reproduce, prioritize, or label an issue, especially when an issue URL or number is supplied.
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using Claude Code via claude-review MCP, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using a secondary Codex agent, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews using Gemini via gemini-review MCP, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
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。
Assess patent novelty and non-obviousness against prior art. Use when user says "专利查新", "patent novelty", "可专利性评估", "patentability check", or wants to evaluate if an invention is patentable.
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。
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. In Copilot CLI it defaults to the native complementary rubber-duck subagent with host-event model evidence; elsewhere it uses Codex, while explicit external reviewer overrides remain available. Implements fixes and re-reviews until a policy-approved positive assessment or max rounds is reached.
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。
Assess community issues, validate technical claims, request missing evidence, and prepare valid work for human disposition.
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。
Periodically self-assess output quality to catch degradation before the judge does.
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。
Develop evidence-backed structural and architectural security hardening proposals from vulnerability disclosures, supplied findings, incident or assessment documents, source code, or a completed Codex Security scan. Use when a user asks for systemic improvements, alternatives beyond per-finding patches, before-and-after security architecture views, engineering tradeoff analysis, or an implementation-ready plan for a selected hardening option. Also use automatically after a Codex Security scan with reportable findings when the top-level scan workflow requests final-report hardening guidance.
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。
Content quality and E-E-A-T assessment for AI citability — evaluate experience, expertise, authoritativeness, trustworthiness, and content structure
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 the full candidate diff, affected consumers, focused tests, evidence identities, and verification gaps.
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。
Append a dated event to a matter's history file and refresh the log row — captures new developments, status changes, risk re-assessments, deadline shifts, and settlement authority changes. Use when the user wants to log an update on a matter, note a development, or record a status change against the portfolio.
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。
Triage an inbound demand letter — extract fields, cross-check the portfolio, assess merit, present response options with a recommendation, and hand off to matter-intake or demand-intake if escalation is warranted. Use when the user says "we got a demand letter", "triage this demand", or shares an incoming demand to evaluate.
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。
Walk through a Data Subject Access Request (or deletion, portability, correction request) and draft the response — verify identity, locate data system-by-system, assess exemptions, draft the acknowledgment and substantive response letters. Use when a DSAR comes in, the user pastes an access/deletion/portability/correction request, or says "DSAR came in", "access request", "right to be forgotten", or "someone wants their data".
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。
Deep briefing on one matter — current posture, what's changed, next deadline, open questions, and a risk re-assessment check, ready before a GC update or outside counsel call. Use when the user says "brief me on [matter]", "where are we on [matter]", or needs a read on a specific matter.
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 or drill flashcards for black-letter memorization — Leitner-style buckets, per-subject markdown storage, drill mode with self-assessment. Use when the user says "drill flashcards", "make flashcards from", "quiz me on cards", or wants to memorize rules.
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。
Infringement triage across trademark, copyright, patent, and trade secret — a flag list with the factors cutting each way, not a finding. Use when assessing whether someone is infringing your IP or whether you might be infringing theirs, when a knockoff or copycat surfaces, or when deciding whether a matter is worth pursuing and how.
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。
Trademark clearance first pass — knockout + similar-marks check producing a flag list, not a clearance opinion. Use when a new mark is proposed, when asked whether a mark is available or to run a knockout search, or when assessing likelihood-of-confusion factors before a full professional search. This skill never concludes a mark is clear.
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。
Reference: review of an inbound vendor agreement against the team playbook in `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/commercial-legal/CLAUDE.md`. Flags deviations, assesses risk, generates specific redline language, and routes to the right approver. Loaded by /commercial-legal:review when a vendor MSA, services agreement, or similar is detected.
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。
Run the cold-start interview — learns your AI governance practice and writes `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal/ai-governance-legal/CLAUDE.md` from your AI policy, a reference impact assessment, and key vendor AI agreements. Use when the practice profile is missing or contains `[PLACEHOLDER]` markers, or when user says "set up ai governance plugin", "onboard me", "configure ai governance".
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 per-system inventory — track each AI system's role (provider, deployer, importer, distributor, authorized representative, product manufacturer) and risk tier (prohibited, high-risk, limited, minimal, GPAI, GPAI+systemic). Role and tier are assessed per system, not per company. Use when the user says "ai inventory", "add an ai system", "what systems do we have", "classify this ai system", "eu ai act register", or "ai system registry".
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。
Guided customization of your AI governance practice profile — change one thing without re-running the whole cold-start interview. Adjust risk posture, escalation contacts, use-case registry entries, vendor AI positions, AI policy commitments, impact-assessment house style, or matter workspace paths. Use when the user says "change my [thing]", "update my profile", "edit my config", "tune my playbook", or "customize".
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。
This skill should be used when the user asks to "triage a vulnerability report", "assess a CVE", "evaluate a bug bounty submission", "decide if a finding is valid", "review a security finding", "dismiss a vulnerability", "should we fix this CVE", "prioritize a vulnerability report", or needs to determine whether an incoming vulnerability report warrants investigation. Applies 7 brocards (rules of thumb) to systematically accept, dismiss, or request more information on vulnerability reports, or needs to filter raw findings from agentic vulnerability discovery pipelines before human review.
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。