「serious」の検索結果

Assess, report, and manage serious incidents involving high-risk AI systems under Article 73 EU AI Act. Covers incident qualification, deadline buckets (2/10/15 days), authority notification, deployer duties (Art. 26(5)), cross-regulation mapping (GDPR/NIS2/MDR), corrective measures, and DACH-specific routing. Use when asked to evaluate whether an AI incident is reportable, draft an Article 73 notification, identify the right authority, or build an AI incident response process.

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。

Verification-first methodology for the Special Panels for Serious Crimes of the Dili District Court (UNTAET, 2000–2006). Citations are verified against JSMP, the UN archives and legal-tools.org. Covers the Los Palos case, the Serious Crimes Unit caseload (391 indicted; about 88 tried) and the SPSC-vs-Jakarta distinction. Research aid, not legal advice. Part of the open-source "Skills for International Justice" library — methodology: github.com/jeannesulzer/international-criminal-tribunals-skills

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。

Ask Questions If Underspecified workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.

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。

Ask Questions If Underspecified workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.

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。

論文や研究計画を共通の評価基準で読み、研究方法、根拠、引用、文章構成を点検するスキル。評価の理由と修正の優先順位、次に直す内容を整理します。

• 投稿前の論文を見直したいとき
• 引用が主張を支えるか確認したいとき
• 研究方法と限界を評価したいとき

Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.

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 and manage writing personas with NNGroup 4-dimension tone framework (Funny-Serious, Formal-Casual, Respectful-Irreverent, Enthusiastic-Matter-of-fact). Personas define readability targets, sentence length distribution, vocabulary tier, contraction frequency, and summary box label. Used by blog-write and blog-rewrite to enforce consistent voice. Use when user says "persona", "voice", "tone", "writing style", "brand voice", "create persona", "use persona".

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。

A short skit where every beat is laid down to serve one punchline. The joke has to land on something visible, and the absurdity only works when the camera and the physics stay dead serious. Use when the user wants a Seedance 2.5 / 2.0 video prompt for this kind of clip (Twist-ending comedy skit; 中文触发词: 反转结尾搞笑短片, 搞笑, 反转, 梗, 沙雕), or asks how published cases of this type were prompted. Read references/cases.md before drafting.

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。

Generates complete FAERS-style pharmacovigilance disproportionality research designs from a user-provided drug class, comparator strategy, adverse-event domain, and patient-group stratification. Always use this skill whenever a user wants to design, plan, or build a spontaneous-report safety signal study using FAERS or a similar pharmacovigilance database, especially when the article logic includes product selection, indication-group stratification, MedDRA-based adverse-event extraction, serious-case filtering, suspect-drug and concomitant-exclusion logic, reporting odds ratio analysis, comparator-drug benchmarking, cross-drug comparison, and cautious signal interpretation without causal overclaiming. Covers five study patterns (single-drug disproportionality workflow, multi-drug class comparison workflow, indication-stratified workflow, comparator-controlled signal screening workflow...

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。

Generates complete FAERS pharmacovigilance study designs for one-drug whole-profile safety mapping using signal detection, subgroup analysis, onset/seriousness characterization, and conservative label-gap interpretation.

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 Codex-native Amazon FBA product validation using LaunchFast MCP and the LegacyX criteria. Use when the user wants a serious viability review for a keyword, niche, or adjacent niche expansion.

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 live web app AS a real user to find usability + behavioural bugs that static reviews miss. REQUIRES proof of interaction (typing, clicking, sending, observing) before any verdict — a sweep that didn't interact terminates with verdict 'Incomplete'. Walks threads, exercises every element, runs the multi-pane stress matrix, visual polish sweep, component perfection checklist, automated a11y (axe-core), pragmatic performance budget (LCP/CLS/INP), scenario battery (11 scenarios), and stress recipes including the real-flavour data battery. Hard gates: console errors/warnings = 0, network 5xx = 0, layout collapse = 0, axe Critical/Serious = 0, perf budget green. Audit-the-audit meta-check rejects rushed reports. Each finding has reproduction steps, evidence path, and suspected code location. Trigger with 'ux audit', 'walkthrough', 'qa sweep', 'audit the app', 'dogfood this', 'check all pages', 'find what's broken', 'stress the UI'.

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。

Elite incident response and legal compliance guidance for data breaches under GDPR Articles 33 & 34. Use when: (1) User reports a data breach or security incident — including "is this even a personal data breach?" triage, (2) User asks about breach notification obligations or deadlines, (3) User mentions "72 hours", Art. 33, Art. 34, or notification requirements, (4) Discussion involves security incidents affecting personal data, (5) User needs breach risk assessment using ENISA methodology, (6) User mentions "Data Breach" or "Incident" or "Data Leakage" or "Ransomware" or "Exfiltration", (7) User needs to determine Controller vs Processor obligations, (8) Cross-border breach scenarios requiring Lead SA determination, (9) User needs a mitigation playbook or immediate response recommendations, (10) User needs audit-ready breach documentation (.docx) or an EDPB-template-aligned breach notification / evidence file — including follow-up and withdrawal notifications, (11) Breach involves an AI system requiring AI Act Art. 73 serious incident screening.

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。

A quick burst of sparks flies from the point you click — a playful tap accent. Reserve for a delightful primary action; skip on serious/destructive ones. No sparks under prefers-reduced-motion.

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。

Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.

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。

Verification guide for citations added during rebuttal writing. Use when Stage 2 responses introduce new references, when the Area Chair asks about a cited paper, or when any citation in the rebuttal might have been AI-generated. Prevents the serious credibility damage of fabricated references in reviewer-facing documents.

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 and manage writing personas with NNGroup 4-dimension tone framework (Funny-Serious, Formal-Casual, Respectful-Irreverent, Enthusiastic-Matter-of-fact). Personas define readability targets, sentence length distribution, vocabulary tier, contraction frequency, and summary box label. Used by blog-write and blog-rewrite to enforce consistent voice. Use when user says "persona", "voice", "tone", "writing style", "brand voice", "create persona", "use persona".

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 the user wants intellectual understanding — learning how or why something works, not getting a task done or soliciting Claude's judgment. Trigger for: - Explicit learning requests: teach, explain, ELI5, walk me through, quiz me, flashcards, "I'm rusty on"; definitions ("what is X") - Terse concept names implying "help me understand this": "Galois theory," "transformers, from scratch" - Confusion signals: "won't stick," "keep mixing these up," "not getting it" - Learning-path questions: prerequisites, sequencing, what to study before X - Conceptual questions about mechanisms, causes, or dynamics Don't trigger for: - Tasks: coding, writing, calculation, translation, factual lookup, news updates - Personal troubleshooting; resource/textbook recommendations - Claude's evaluative verdict: opinion prompts ("do you think X", "settle this", "honest take", "is X dead / still taken seriously") and interpretive takes ("was X really as harsh as people say")

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。

Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts araise.

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 and manage writing personas with NNGroup 4-dimension tone framework (Funny-Serious, Formal-Casual, Respectful-Irreverent, Enthusiastic-Matter-of-fact). Personas define readability targets, sentence length distribution, vocabulary tier, contraction frequency, and summary box label. Used by blog-write and blog-rewrite to enforce consistent voice. Use when user says "persona", "voice", "tone", "writing style", "brand voice", "create persona", "use persona".

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。

欧盟 AI 法案知识引擎——以 70 份官方欧盟来源文件为基础的权威监管问答（包括 2026 年委员会关于 Art. 6 高风险分类的指南草稿——一般原则、附件 I、附件 III）。基于完整条例文本、委员会指南、EDPB/EDPS 意见、《实践守则》、协调标准、FRIA 指南、事件模板和行业特定指引，以条款级引用回答关于 AI 法案的任何问题。当用户询问"EU AI Act"、"AI Act regulation"、"Regulation 2024/1689"、"KI-Verordnung"、要求"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"，或任何关于欧盟人工智能监管的问题时，应使用本技能。德语术语同样触发："KI-Gesetz"、"KI-Verordnung"、"Hochrisiko-KI"、"KI-Kompetenz"、"Grundrechte-Folgenabschaetzung"、"GPAI-Verhaltenskodex"。对于产出分类决定而非知识答案的评估工作流，提议在会话内运行结构化风险等级分类。

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。

Produces a plain-language comparison of advance directives and POLST/MOLST forms, covering legal status, clinician signatures, emergency precedence, clinical appropriateness, and document coordination. Use when the user asks about advance directive vs. POLST, living will vs. DNR, which document EMS follows, POLST vs. MOLST vs. POST, whether a healthy person needs a POLST, or document coordination in elder law, estate planning, or serious illness contexts.

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。

Drafts an Adverse Event Reporting Policy compliant with 21 CFR 312.32 (IND safety reporting), 21 CFR 314.80 (postmarketing), and ICH E2A, with multi-jurisdictional overlays (EMA, PMDA, Health Canada). Covers seriousness/causality frameworks, expedited reporting timelines, roles, documentation standards, training mandates, and QA mechanisms. Use when drafting or updating an adverse event reporting policy, pharmacovigilance policy, AE/SAE reporting SOP, or safety reporting framework for a pharmaceutical company, CRO, biotech, or clinical research institution.

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。