「cis」の検索結果

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。

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。

Convert agreed scope into a structured matter plan — phases, workstreams, milestones, dependencies, owner assignments, and matter setup decisions. Use when planning a new matter, running a kickoff, building a workstream plan, structuring phases, setting up task codes, or producing a plan to drive status reporting. Trigger on: 'build a plan', 'matter plan', 'project plan', 'what are the phases', 'workstream plan', 'how do we sequence this', 'who owns what', 'task codes', 'matter setup', 'workstream plan', 'matter plan', 'rolling wave', 'plan the next phase', 'what comes first', 'kickoff agenda'.

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。

Mandatory external verification workflow for ALL non-trivial factual claims before presenting them as true. This skill MUST be used whenever Claude is asked to research any topic, answer factual questions, provide current information, draft documents containing factual claims, give legal advice or cite legal authority, discuss current events or public figures, provide technical or scientific information, state statistics or data points, or answer ANY question where the answer could have changed over time. Also trigger when the user asks Claude to 'check', 'verify', 'confirm', 'research', 'look up', or 'find out' anything, or when the user needs information that requires freshness, precision, or source accuracy. This skill overrides any default tendency to answer from memory. If a task involves stating facts, citing sources, or providing current information — 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。

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。

Research, drafting, and analysis involving the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute system). Enforces a verification-first methodology — every case-law, decision, filing, warrant, and statement citation is verified against an authoritative primary source (icc-cpi.int, legal-tools.org) in the current conversation before it appears in an output. Foundational texts (Rome Statute, Elements of Crimes, RPE, Regulations of the Court) may be cited from project knowledge when present. Use whenever the user is working with ICC case law, OTP statements, ASP documents, or ICC procedure.

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。

Restructure any rough build, research, or legal-drafting request into an IRAC-shaped prompt — Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion — optimized for a frontier model. It's the bar-exam framework, repurposed as prompt engineering. The skill leads with the issue and ends with the conclusion (where models weight attention most), forces you to name your constraints and non-goals, and specifies what "good" looks like before a single token is generated. Use it before any non-trivial build, or whenever a vague ask deserves a precise brief.

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 Digital Regulation Legal Analysis Forge — generates a tailored expert prompt for structured legal analysis of an EU digital-regulation document, optionally executes it in-session, and always produces a plain-English explainer alongside the formal output. Handles Regulations, Directives, Commission Guidelines, EDPB Opinions, CJEU and AG judgments, national DPA decisions, codes of conduct, and draft consultations across the EU digital stack.

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。

Arbitrator research tool for investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS). The tool can summarize arbitrators' experience, with deliverables grounded in primary documents; it can also help find arbitrators based on the issues faced in a particular case. Use when the user asks about an arbitrator ("tell me about arbitrator X", "X, Y and Z"), wants help choosing or shortlisting arbitrators for a case, or asks about appointments, dissents, issue track records (e.g. FET, expropriation), challenge risk, double-hatting, or tribunal composition. Profiles are grounded in the UNCTAD ISDS Navigator dataset plus targeted live lookups (ICSID); deep verification retrieves the actual decisions. Sibling of isds-research.

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 when asked to find, cite, analyze, or summarize Icelandic court decisions. Triggers on requests involving Hæstiréttur (Supreme Court), Landsréttur (Court of Appeal), Félagsdómur (Labour Court), héraðsdómur (District Court) case law, or Icelandic legal precedent research.

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 when asked to translate, explain, or map Icelandic legal terms to English (or vice versa). Triggers on requests involving Icelandic legal vocabulary, legal translation, understanding Icelandic statutes or court decisions, or cross-referencing Icelandic and common law concepts.

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。

Depth assessment of whether an AI system is high-risk under Art. 6 of the EU AI Act, grounded in the Commission's draft Art. 6(5) classification guidelines (general principles + Annex I + Annex III). Covers the Annex I product-safety route, all eight Annex III areas with worked examples, the Art. 6(3) exception and its profiling re-exception, and the Art. 25 quasi-provider trap. Outputs a structured decision block, a practitioner memo, and a JSON interchange artefact.

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。

Classify AI systems under the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) and determine compliance obligations. Use when asked to assess AI risk level, check if an AI system is prohibited, determine high-risk status, identify GPAI model obligations, map provider/deployer responsibilities, or build an AI Act compliance roadmap. Covers the full classification decision tree (Prohibited → High-Risk → Limited → Minimal → GPAI), obligations by role (provider, deployer, importer, distributor), compliance timelines, and DACH-specific considerations (German works council, BaFin, BSI, BNetzA). Triggers on phrases like "classify this AI system", "is this high-risk under the AI Act", "AI Act risk assessment", "EU AI Act compliance", "prohibited AI practice", "GPAI obligations", "AI Act timeline".

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 guidance for FedRAMP certification and compliance under CR26 (FedRAMP Consolidated Rules for 2026). Use this skill whenever a user asks about FedRAMP authorization, ATO (Authority to Operate), cloud security for federal government, NIST SP 800-53 controls, CSP compliance, or any of the core FedRAMP document types: SSP, SAP, SAR, POA&M, CIS/CRM workbooks. Also trigger for questions about FedRAMP Certification Classes (A, B, C, D — new baseline labels: A = pilot/transitional, B = LI-SaaS/Low, C = Moderate, D = High, per NTC-0004), FedRAMP 20x (now the primary authorization pathway), OSCAL mandate (September 2026), 3PAO assessments, continuous monitoring (ConMon), gap assessments, system boundary definition, or architecture reviews for federal cloud. FedRAMP Ready retires July 28, 2026. When in doubt, use this skill — it covers the full FedRAMP lifecycle from readiness through continuous monitoring.

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。

Searches the domestic courts of 122 jurisdictions — 153 databases, 49 automated — for extradition and arrest-warrant surrender decisions, each in its own language and vocabulary. Answers the question no commercial database does: how are OTHER executing states treating this requesting state, or this ground? Searching by requesting state localises its name per jurisdiction (AE becomes 'Emiratele Arabe Unite' in Romania, 'Emirati Arabi Uniti' in Italy), so the sweep finds what those courts actually wrote. Every hit passes a relevance gate; every search leaves a dated report, so the research is reconstructable months later. Use when asked what foreign courts have said about surrender to a given state, whether any European court has refused extradition on prison conditions, assurances or Article 3, for comparative extradition research, or to build a foreign-authority section of an extradition argument. Not for domestic case law of the user's own jurisdiction, and never a substitute for reading the judgment.

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。

Analyse systématique d'un Data Processing Agreement (DPA) au regard de l'article 28 RGPD, des lignes directrices EDPB 07/2020 et 02/2024, des CCT 2021 (décision d'exécution 2021/914), des recommandations EDPB 01/2020 (mesures supplémentaires post-Schrems II), et du Règlement (UE) 2024/1689 (Règlement IA). Produit un rapport structuré clause par clause (18 clauses : 13 obligatoires + 5 complémentaires) avec diagnostic 🟢/🟡/🔴, remédiations prêtes à insérer, analyse détaillée des transferts internationaux, vérification Règlement IA, et questions à poser au fournisseur. Triggers : "analyse de DPA", "audit DPA", "vérifier un DPA", "DPA fournisseur", "data processing agreement", "art. 28 RGPD", "sous-traitant RGPD", "négociation DPA", "review DPA", "conformité contrat sous-traitance".

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。

U.S. customs and trade-law research assistant for HTS classification, CROSS ruling research, CIT/CAFC decision briefing, duty compilation (General + Special + Chapter 99 + AD/CVD + MPF/HMF), country of origin determination, FTA qualification, and end-to-end import compliance review. Triggers on product classification, tariff questions, customs rulings, trade remedy screening (Section 301/232/201), Partner Government Agency admissibility, and UFLPA forced-labor analysis. Produces attorney-reviewable draft work product with an enforced HTSUS authority hierarchy and explicit evidence 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。

When you want multiple expert perspectives on a founder/operator question — a simulated board of advisors (Jason Fried, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Jensen Huang, Bob Iger, Paul Graham, Naval Ravikant, Sara Blakely). Bring a real decision — "should I raise prices?", "hire my first employee?", "raise or bootstrap?", "kill this project?" — and the council weighs in through documented frameworks, surfaces disagreements, and synthesizes a recommendation. Also use for 'maker council,' 'board of advisors,' 'what would Bezos do,' 'what would Jason Fried say,' 'channel Naval,' 'ask the council,' or how a famous founder would approach a problem. Optional live-research pass via deep-research / watch-video / last30days. Marketing questions go to marketing-skills' marketing-council. Archives to ~/.config/makerskills/maker-council/archive/. To commit to a direction, hand off to decide.

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。

Monthly CFO workflow for a company or agency — pull raw data from bank + payment processor + payroll + expense management, categorize and reconcile, compute end-of-month cash via transaction-sum method, update a scenario projector for forward forecasting, write the monthly snapshot report, surface decisions to leadership. Modes — monthly (default; the standing report), weekly (thin cash pulse), scenario (ad-hoc modeling in the projector), pickup (resume where the prior run left off). Anonymized team-scope sibling to personal-cfo (which handles personal household finances). Composes with company-brain (report gets stored + wiki-indexed there), toolify (wire company-specific data sources), loopify (schedule the monthly + weekly runs). Triggers on "/company-cfo," "/cfo," "monthly cash report," "do the CFO snapshot," "CFO monthly," "let's run CFO," "cash projection," "runway forecast," "monthly financials," "cash pulse."

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。

When you paste raw human input — a call transcript (Grain, Zoom, Granola, Fathom), a text or email from a client/partner/friend, a voice-memo dump, or meeting notes — and want it converted into structured work. Extracts decisions, action items (yours vs theirs), bugs/feature requests, and facts worth keeping; files GitHub issues in the right repo, captures to the second-brain vault, and drafts (never sends) the reply. Triggers on "/ingest", "ingest this", "here's my call with X," "here's the transcript," "this is from [person]," "[person] asked me this," "from [person]:", a pasted transcript with speaker labels, or a forwarded client message that clearly expects processing. Person→project routing lives in a private config; unknown senders get asked about once, then remembered.

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。

When you want to model personal financial scenarios — house purchase + rental income (ADU, bedroom rentals, house-hacking), renovation budgets, monthly cash flow, big-purchase decisions, savings/investment what-ifs for a household. Ships with a house scenario template; other scenarios (refi, car, education, retirement, side income) slot in as templates. Outputs markdown scenario comparison tables. Saves scenarios to ~/Documents/personal-cfo/ with an index in ~/.config/makerskills/personal-cfo/archive/. Composes with decide, deep-research (rental comps, rates), business-brainstorm, second-brain. Triggers on "/personal-cfo," "model this scenario," "house math," "rental forecast," "monthly cash flow," "what if I rent out the ADU," "compare these housing scenarios," "should we buy this house," "house-hack math," "renovation budget."

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。