3,252 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Generate elaborative interrogation prompts that deepen encoding through targeted why and how questions. Use when students memorise without understanding or need deeper processing of content.
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Build students' capacity to read historical documents closely — attending to word choice, tone, and rhetoric as evidence of perspective.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。
Generate a cascading hint sequence for a problem type, revealing progressively without giving answers. Use when designing tutoring dialogues or scaffolded worksheets.
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 learning sequence teaching prompt quality — comparing vague vs. refined prompts to show why specificity and context transform AI output. Use when students use AI without understanding why output quality varies.
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。
Create self-explanation prompts that deepen understanding of worked examples, texts, or diagrams. Use when students read material passively without engaging with underlying principles.
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。
Pick the right LLM for CONTRACT REVIEW — reviewing an existing agreement for risk, deviations from standard, missing protections, and internal contradictions, and proposing redlines. Vendor-neutral routing grounded in mid-2026 legal benchmarks. Contract review is a COMPOSITE skill (extraction + reasoning + redlining + conflict-detection), so this routes by the dominant sub-task. Asks up to 4 quick questions (cost, speed, accuracy/stakes, privacy/jurisdiction/ language), then recommends a primary model + fallback + what to avoid + what a human must verify. Use when someone asks "which model to review this contract / NDA / MSA", "best AI to redline", "route this contract review", or is about to review an agreement without a fixed model.
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。
Pick the right LLM for LEGAL INFO EXTRACTION — pulling facts, clauses, dates, parties, obligations, and structured fields out of contracts and legal documents. Vendor-neutral routing grounded in mid-2026 benchmarks (legalbenchmarks.ai Info Extraction; CUAD/MAUD/ACORD). Asks up to 4 quick questions (cost, speed, accuracy/stakes, privacy/jurisdiction/language), then recommends a primary model + fallback + what to avoid + what a human must verify. Use when someone asks "which model should I use to extract clauses/data from these documents", "best AI for contract data extraction", "route this extraction task", or is about to pull structured fields from legal docs without a fixed model.
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。
Pick the right LLM for LEGAL RESEARCH & ANALYSIS — issue-spotting, rule application, case/statute analysis, memos, and multi-step agentic research. Vendor-neutral routing grounded in mid-2026 benchmarks (Vals AI LegalBench across 124 models; Harvey Legal Agent Benchmark for agentic work). Asks up to 4 quick questions (cost, speed, accuracy/stakes, privacy/jurisdiction/language), then recommends a primary model + fallback + what to avoid + what a human must verify. Use when someone asks "which model for legal research / case analysis / a memo", "best AI for legal reasoning", "route this research task", or is starting legal analysis without a fixed model.
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。
Pick the right LLM for LEGAL TRANSLATION — translating contracts, statutes, case law, and legal correspondence across languages, including Arabic/MENA. Vendor-neutral routing triangulated from mid-2026 evidence (WMT25 human eval, SwiLTra-Bench legal-MT, multilingual-reasoning proxies, ArabLegalEval). There is NO clean legal-translation leaderboard, so this vertical is directional and treats human legal-linguist review as mandatory. Asks up to 4 quick questions (language pair, cost, speed, privacy/certification), then recommends a primary model + fallback + what to avoid + what a human must verify. Use when someone asks "which model to translate this contract/statute", "best AI for legal translation", "translate this legal doc to/from Arabic", or is about to machine-translate legal text without a fixed model.
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。
Expert ISO 27701 Privacy Information Management System (PIMS) compliance advisor. Use this skill whenever a user asks about ISO/IEC 27701:2025, ISO/IEC 27701:2019, privacy information management, PIMS certification, PII controller or processor obligations, privacy risk assessment, Statement of Applicability for privacy, privacy by design, data subject rights, DPIA, records of processing activities, transitioning from ISO 27701:2019, GDPR alignment with ISO 27701, or any privacy management system topic. Also trigger for questions about Annex A.1 (controller controls), A.2 (processor controls), A.3 (shared security controls), or implementing a standalone PIMS without ISO 27001. When in doubt, use this skill — it covers the full ISO 27701 lifecycle from gap assessment through certification.
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。
Rigorous multi-pass editor for law review articles, student notes, seminar papers and other legal scholarship. Runs six specialized passes — structure, substantive critique, Bluebook citations, grammar and clarity, fact-checking against sources, and a synthesizing memo — and delivers an editorial memo with issues prioritized as critical, substantial or minor and keyed to specific footnotes and paragraphs. Handles articles of any length, including 50,000-word pieces, by chunking on section boundaries. Reads .docx directly. Use when editing, critiquing, workshopping or pre-submission-reviewing academic legal writing. Triggers on "edit my article," "review this draft," "critique my note," "check my Bluebook citations," "is my argument sound," "read my law review piece," "workshop this paper," "pre-submission review." Chunking needs Python 3; fact-checking needs web search; both degrade gracefully without.
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。
An end-to-end method for drafting and finalising a complex, multi-pillar regulated fintech agreement — from intake to signature. Authored from a senior fintech lawyer's manual: a licensed payment-services provider engaging a counterparty across agent cash-in/cash-out, QR payments, wallet e-payments, and a marketplace, each with its own regulatory profile. Runs five phases and fourteen steps: regulatory mapping (activity-to-licence matrix, grey-zone classification gates), architecture (framework-plus-sub-agreement structure, ring-fenced marketplace), the regulatory–commercial balance (what flexes vs what cannot), core drafting (authority, float mechanics, hard-coded regulator caps, liability — all tracking control), execution-blocker triage, and a pre-signature check closing open blockers as conditions precedent. It refuses to invent licence-specific values or draft a representation as true without executed evidence. Use it to structure, draft, negotiate, or review any regulated payments contract.
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。
Writes the formal letter you send before suing someone in a civil case in England & Wales — the Letter Before Claim that starts the pre-action clock. The part it gets right is which pre-action protocol applies — debt, professional negligence, housing disrepair, personal injury, or the default Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct — each of which has its own rules a generic letter misses (the 30-day debt window, the professional-negligence preliminary-notice step). It also flags the limitation deadline for a solicitor to confirm rather than stating it as fact. Built for litigation juniors, in-house counsel, and small firms without a precedent to copy. Use when the user says 'draft an LBC', 'letter before claim', 'pre-action letter', 'pre-action protocol', or needs to start the pre-action clock before issuing a civil claim. Verify the current protocol before sending.
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。
This skill builds a structured audit trail of an AI-assisted task: what the tool was asked to do, what materials it was given, what it produced, how the output was verified, and what was ultimately relied upon. It documents the workflow for supervision and later review without ruling on privilege or disclosure, so the record stays accurate rather than self-serving.
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。
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。
Static analysis of UEFI/BIOS firmware dumps using Intel's chipsec framework. Decode firmware structure, detect known malware and rootkits (LoJax, ThinkPwn, HackingTeam, MosaicRegressor), generate EFI executable inventories with hashes, extract NVRAM variables, and parse SPI flash descriptors. Use when analyzing firmware .bin/.rom/.fd/.cap files offline without requiring hardware 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。
Deconstruct a novel for game adaptation. Compress a raw novel, deconstruction library, or writing project into a SOURCE_BIBLE with cited textual evidence, extracting world rules, player verbs, spaces, character will, systems, and visual anchors — without inventing a genre yet. Use for gameable book analysis, analyze a novel for game adaptation, extract game systems from a book. 游戏化拆书。把原始小说、拆文库或写作工程压缩成有必要原文证据的 SOURCE_BIBLE，提取世界规则、玩家动词、空间、角色意志、系统和视觉锚点，不提前发明游戏类型。用于游戏化拆书、分析小说的游戏改编基础等需求。
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。
Verify a game with evidence on its selected target runtime. Launch the actual build and prove real rendering, input, the core loop, at least one designed outcome, restart, and explicit limitations without dressing subjective fun up as a certain verdict. Use for test a generated game, QA a game build, check whether the game is fully playable, or verify the build. 游戏证据化质量验证。在选定的目标运行环境中启动实际构建，证明真实渲染、输入、核心循环、至少一个设计结果、重开和明确限制，不把主观趣味包装成确定性结论。用于测试生成游戏、检查游戏能否完整游玩或验证构建。
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 a Classic Easter seasonal overlay: pastel Theme/StyleBox injection, confetti/shimmer VFX, elastic juice, mesh surface_override painting, cursor/audio swaps, and a date-window activation gate with player opt-out. Use when shipping holiday skins, April events, or egg-hunt juice without mutating shared .mesh/.tres assets. Keywords: pastel, seasonal Theme, StyleBox, confetti, Easter egg, surface_override, TRANS_ELASTIC, Disable Seasonal Themes, activation gate.
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 testing decision trees for GdUnit4: unit vs scene vs CI gates, headless runners, snapshots, and mock networks. Use when choosing test layers, wiring CI, or validating signals/physics without beginner assert catalogs. Keywords: GdUnit4, GdUnitTestSuite, headless CI, snapshot test, mock network, scene integration test, TDD.
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。