thuyran

@thuyran source repo

76 skills
0 followers
5 hours ago last updated

▌
Case Retrieval 2 · thuyran bundle
Trigger this skill when the user needs to find similar cases, related judgments, or adjudicative rules relevant to a current legal issue. Typical triggers include: the user expressly asks to find similar cases or precedents; supporting a legal argument with prior judgments; case outcome prediction that requires reference to like cases; drafting legal documents that need citation of authoritative cases; analyzing judicial practice trends on a legal issue; comparing adjudicative positions of different courts or periods on the same issue. Keywords include, without limitation: similar cases, related judgments, case retrieval, adjudicative rules, like cases, Guiding Cases, typical cases, judicial viewpoints, adjudicative holdings (裁判要旨), etc.

0
installs
▌
Legal Terminology 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when an AI agent, in generating, reviewing, or revising any legal text (including but not limited to contracts, pleadings, legal opinions, judicial documents, statutory commentaries, legal memoranda, etc.), must ensure that legal terminology is accurate, unambiguous, and consistent with legal stylistic requirements. Trigger scenarios include: 1. Drafting or revising legal instruments and needing to select correct legal terms; 2. Reviewing legal text and finding nonstandard, confused, or ambiguous terminology; 3. Converting everyday language into standardized legal expression; 4. Translating or aligning Chinese and foreign legal terms; 5. The user expressly requests terminology standardization of legal text; 6. Precisely defining or explaining legal concepts. This skill is a foundational atomic capability for legal writing and runs through all legal-text production stages.

0
installs
▌
Conflict Resolution 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when an AI agent encounters any of the following during legal reasoning: (1) multiple legal provisions may apply to the same facts (concurrence of legal norms / 法条竞合); (2) contradictions or inconsistencies among different pieces of evidence (evidentiary conflict / 证据矛盾); (3) multiple disputed issues requiring a determination of hearing or analysis order (issue priority ranking / 争点优先级排序); (4) different sources of law (statutes, regulations, judicial interpretations, local regulations, etc.) providing divergent rules on the same question (conflict of legal sources / 法源冲突); (5) tension between a party's claims and legal application that requires coordination. This skill is a core hub capability for legal reasoning; nearly all complex legal analyses involve some form of conflict resolution.

0
installs
▌
Deductive Reasoning 2 · thuyran
Perform rigorous legal deductive reasoning based on formal logic. Use this skill when the user asks to "analyze case logic", "verify legal reasoning", "extract a syllogism", "map the relationship between case facts and legal provisions", or "assess the validity of a legal argument". Provides a formal-logic framework for legal reasoning that turns unstructured legal norms and case facts into valid, testable, and reproducible deductive argument chains (P-F-C).

0
installs
▌
Evidence Evaluation 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when evidence materials in a case need to be assessed for authenticity, legality, and relevance (the “three attributes” of evidence / 三性), as well as for probative value. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - After a party or counsel submits evidence, assessing whether the court is likely to admit it - Responding to and analyzing the opposing party’s cross-examination / challenge opinions on one’s own evidence - Conducting a comprehensive evaluation of all evidence in the case to determine whether facts to be proved are established - Determining whether evidence meets the applicable standard of proof (e.g., high degree of probability, beyond reasonable doubt) - Identifying weak links in the chain of evidence and proposing reinforcement recommendations - Assessing the validity of special forms of evidence such as electronic data, expert opinions, and witness testimony - Identifying and arguing exclusion of illegally obtained evidence

0
installs
▌
Inductive Reasoning 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when one or more concrete cases, judgments, or fact patterns must be distilled into general legal rules, adjudicative rules, or legal principles. Typical triggers include: summarizing adjudicative holdings from a series of cases; extracting generalizable legal propositions from individual cases; identifying common legal rules across multiple fact patterns; building adjudicative-rule digests for similar-case retrieval; and summarizing judicial application standards from practice precedents.

0
installs
▌
Analogical Reasoning 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when the AI agent must handle any of the following situations: 1. The current case/issue has no direct, clear rule in positive law (a legal gap / lacuna); 2. Existing precedents, similar cases, or closely related legal norms must be used to derive a solution for the present issue; 3. The user expressly asks to "refer to," "apply by analogy," or "analogically apply" (参照 / 比照 / 类推适用) a particular norm or case; 4. Legal argumentation must rest on the principle that "like cases should be treated alike" (相似案件相似处理); 5. Similarity and difference between two or more cases/norms must be assessed to decide whether analogy is warranted; 6. In contexts such as contract interpretation, determination of tort liability, or discretionary administrative penalties, experience from similar situations must be used to build the argument. The core of this skill is: identify the basis of similarity (tertium comparationis), justify the analogy, and on that basis reach a reasoned legal conclusion.

0
installs
▌
Legal Risk Assessment 2 · thuyran
Assess an enterprise’s regulatory penalty risk across four dimensions: licensing/qualifications, compliance with regulatory rules, and historical penalty/credit records.

0
installs
▌
Other Legal Retrieval 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when the agent needs to retrieve auxiliary legal information beyond statutes, judicial interpretations, and typical cases. Includes but is not limited to: legislative background materials (draft explanations, deliberation reports, legislature press conferences), regulatory cases and administrative penalty decisions, local guiding opinions and meeting minutes, drafting notes and policy interpretations of departmental rules, industry standards and technical norms, reports on law implementation, NPC Standing Committee law-enforcement inspection reports, white papers and policy documents, prevailing academic views and authoritative textbook positions, and comparative foreign-law materials. Trigger when the user’s question involves contexts such as 'why is it so provided,' 'what is the legislative purpose,' 'how do regulators handle this in practice,' 'what special local rules exist,' or 'what is industry practice.'

0
installs
▌
Case Lifecycle Planning 2 · thuyran
Case full-lifecycle planning skill. Triggered when the user needs to plan a case preparation timeline, create or inquire about case preparation milestones, or generate a case litigation roadmap and key-date overview. Typical trigger keywords: "case preparation", "case preparation planning", "case preparation timeline", "plan case preparation pace", "schedule hearing". Does not handle assignment of cases to lawyers, nor general programming tasks unrelated to case management.

0
installs
▌
Evidence Argument Chain 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when multiple pieces of evidence in a case must be systematically mapped to legal argumentative claims. Typical trigger scenarios include: preparing litigation documents (complaint, answer, counsel's brief) that require a complete evidence–claim correspondence; organizing the evidence list before trial and clarifying the purpose of proof for each item; reorganizing the evidence chain after the opposing party raises rebuttals; cases with multiple disputed issues where evidence must be grouped under different argumentative claims; assessing whether existing evidence sufficiently supports all claims and identifying weak links and gaps in the evidence chain. The core of this skill is to build a complete mapping of "claim → elements → evidence → probative-value assessment," ensuring every legal claim is adequately supported by evidence, every piece of evidence has a clear purpose of proof, and the overall argumentative chain is logically rigorous and hierarchically clear.

0
installs
▌
Judicial Value Judgment 2 · thuyran
Assist judges in structured, reviewable, and argueable judicial value judgment in scenarios involving rights conflicts, legal uncertainty, proportionality review, and discretionary reasoning. This Skill helps judges in hard cases identify conflicts of legal values, determine the boundaries of discretion, conduct value weighing, and form analytical frameworks usable in adjudicative reasoning. It does not replace the judge’s final decision; it helps convert value judgment into judicial reasoning grounded in facts, norms, and argument structure.

0
installs
▌
Legal Article Retrieval 2 · thuyran bundle
Generate standardized legal research reports for case retrieval, statutory research, similar-case analysis, and related legal research scenarios. Use when the user needs industry or professional analysis, prediction of adjudication outcomes, verification of the validity of legal authorities, confirmation of legal bases for claims or defenses, or analysis of judicial practice tendencies. Supports litigation strategy assessment, trial preparation, compliance review, legal training, and other legal practice scenarios.

0
installs
▌
Counterfactual Reasoning 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when you need to assess how legal outcomes would differ if a given fact, act, or condition did not exist or were altered. Typical trigger scenarios include: causation determinations (whether harm would still have occurred without the act), allocation of fault and liability shares, delimiting the scope of damages, calculating contract breach losses, hypothetical legality tests for administrative acts, assessing interruption of criminal causation, and legislative impact assessment. The core method is to construct a 'counterfactual world' that differs from the actual world only in the target variable, compare outcome differences between the two worlds, and thereby determine the target variable's contribution to the result.

0
installs
▌
Formal Legal Consequence 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when you need to derive concrete legal consequences from confirmed legal facts, identified legal relationships, and matched legal norms—including but not limited to types and scope of civil liability, calculation of damages, determination of criminal sentences, types and ranges of administrative penalties, and contract validity status. Typical trigger scenarios include: - The user asks "how much compensation can I get" or "what liability will the other party bear" - The user asks "how many years would this conduct get" or "how much is the fine" - Deriving specific legal effects from whether constitutive elements (构成要件) are satisfied - Calculating quantified outcomes such as damages amounts, sentencing ranges, or liquidated damages - Reaching a final legal consequence after weighing aggravating, mitigating, and exempting adjustment factors This skill is the terminal link in the legal reasoning chain: it converts abstract legal norms into concrete, actionable legal conclusions.

0
installs
▌
Legal Element Extraction 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when legally significant facts need to be extracted from unstructured text such as case descriptions, party statements, chat logs, or media reports. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - The user provides an everyday-language case description and asks to extract legal facts - The user asks to convert colloquial, emotional narratives into a fact structure usable for legal analysis - The user asks to distinguish "objective facts," "subjective judgments," and "legal evaluations" in a case narrative - The user asks to map extracted facts onto constitutive elements of a particular legal relationship - The user asks to organize a case timeline or produce a fact-sorting table - The user asks to convert everyday language into legal language (e.g., "he's been dragging his feet and won't pay me back" → "failed to perform after the performance period expired") Core value of this skill: Organize mixed life narratives into a fact structure that can enter legal reasoning—a preparat

0
installs
▌
Legal Abductive Reasoning 2 · thuyran
Legal abductive reasoning skill for generating and evaluating the most reasonable explanatory hypotheses when evidence is incomplete or facts are ambiguous. Combines Mill’s five methods (agreement, difference, joint method, residues, concomitant variation) for structured causal inference. Triggered when the user needs to “propose possible legal explanations,” “generate defense/prosecution hypotheses,” “evaluate multiple readings of evidence,” or “infer the best explanation from incomplete facts.” Applies to case analysis, evidence evaluation, disputes over rule application, causal inference, and similar scenarios.

0
installs
▌
Legal Document Formatting 2 · thuyran
Draft complete civil or criminal judgments based on the document-production standards of Chinese people's courts. Use this skill when the user asks to "draft a judgment", "generate a judicial document", "write a civil judgment", "write a criminal judgment", "prepare a document from the case file", or provides case-file materials and requests a judgment document. While drafting each section, autonomously invoke atomic skills (e.g., dispute-issue identification, statutory retrieval, deductive reasoning, evidence-efficacy evaluation).

0
installs
▌
Legal Judgment Prediction 2 · thuyran
Based on a case-fact narrative, orchestrate 8 atomic capabilities to predict charges, applicable provisions, sentence length, and sentencing circumstances, and output a structured prediction report with confidence assessment.

0
installs
▌
Legal Norm Validity Check 2 · thuyran bundle
Trigger this skill when, after retrieving a concrete legal provision in the course of legal reasoning, the AI agent must verify that provision's legal force (validity). Trigger conditions include, without limitation: 1. Before the agent cites any statutory provision as a basis for reasoning; 2. When the user provides a provision and asks for an analysis of its applicability; 3. When multiple norms may conflict and priority of application must be determined; 4. When temporal force is in doubt (possible amendment or repeal); 5. When it must be confirmed whether a normative document has legally binding force; 6. When cross-tier or cross-region application of norms raises questions. This skill ensures that every legal norm the agent cites is currently in force, correctly tiered, and free of conflict with higher-tier and same-tier norms, thereby safeguarding the reliability and authority of legal-reasoning conclusions.

0
installs
▌
Systematic Interpretation 2 · thuyran
Systematic interpretation (体系解释) addresses disputes over meaning or scope of application that remain after textual interpretation, by reference to the provision’s position in the legal system (which statute, book, chapter, or section), the meaning of related norms, or what the law as a system properly requires, so as to adopt the interpretation most consistent with systemic coherence and thereby clarify the provision’s meaning and scope from a systemic perspective. Trigger conditions (invoke if any one is met):

0
installs
▌
Argument Chain Construction 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when an AI agent needs to organize legal reasoning results into a complete, internally consistent, and persuasive argumentative structure. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - Drafting the argumentative sections of legal documents such as legal opinions, written submissions (代理词), defense briefs (辩护词), and answers/pleadings (答辩状) - Answering complex legal questions from the user that require multi-step reasoning and a presented conclusion - Systematically analyzing disputed issues and constructing a complete reasoning path from facts to law to conclusion - Rebutting an opposing view by constructing an alternative argument chain - Conducting comprehensive analysis of multiple legal issues while ensuring logical consistency and non-contradiction among arguments - Presenting analytical conclusions in a legal research memorandum Trigger-signal keywords: argument, analysis, reasoning, why, prove, grounds/reasons, discourse, articulate a position, legal analysis

0
installs
▌
Legal Concept Comprehension 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when the user asks to explain, distinguish, unpack, or understand a legal concept. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - The user directly asks "what is XX" or "how should XX be understood" - The user asks to compare similarities and differences between two legal concepts (e.g., "the difference between unjust enrichment and negotiorum gestio") - The user presents specific facts and asks whether they constitute a legal concept (e.g., "A mistakenly transferred money to B; does this constitute unjust enrichment?") - The user encounters unfamiliar terminology in legal analysis, drafting, or contract review - The user asks to unpack the constitutive elements of a concept or analyze its legal effects This skill is a foundational unit of legal analysis, providing the conceptual basis for applying legal rules, analyzing cases, and drafting legal documents.

0
installs
▌
Teleological Interpretation 2 · thuyran
Teleological interpretation skill (目的解释). When textual interpretation of a legal provision still cannot yield a determinate conclusion, systematically discover and argue the purpose of the provision, choose the most justified meaning within the range the text can bear, and form an adjudicable interpretive conclusion. Trigger conditions (any one suffices): textual interpretation yields two or more meanings and none can be chosen; the textual conclusion is clearly unreasonable; the provision contains open evaluative concepts (e.g., “reasonable,” “正当,” “necessary,” “重大”); the provision is relatively old and textual coverage is inadequate for novel facts.

0
installs
▌
Argument Strength Evaluation 2 · thuyran
After an AI agent completes a segment of legal reasoning or argumentation, it must self-assess the resulting conclusion: judge the overall strength and confidence of the argument, and identify and flag weak links in the reasoning chain. Trigger conditions include, but are not limited to: - After completing legal analysis, a reliability rating for the conclusion is needed - The user expressly requests an evaluation of the persuasiveness or reliability of a given argument - Multiple competing legal interpretations require comparison of argument strength - The reasoning involves uncertainties (unclear facts, legal gaps, contested views) that need to be flagged - Risk warnings are needed for decision-makers, explaining the limitations of the conclusion - Offensive or defensive strength of one's own or the opposing party's legal arguments must be assessed - Confidence statements must be attached in legal opinions, memoranda, or similar documents

0
installs
▌
Dispute And Performance Risk 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when the user submits a contract text, transaction arrangement, commercial agreement, or description of a legal relationship and needs an assessment of potential legal disputes or breach-of-contract risks. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - The user asks for a contract review and identification of potential risks - The user asks whether a transaction arrangement has performance obstacles - The user describes difficulties in contract performance and needs a judgment on whether they constitute breach - The user asks for a risk rating of contract clauses - The user provides an agreement between two or more parties and asks to identify likely dispute focal points - The user describes an already-occurred performance deviation and needs an assessment of legal consequences - Forward-looking risk identification in contract review, due diligence, deal negotiation, and similar scenarios This skill focuses on two core questions—"whether legal disputes may arise" and "whether

0
installs
▌
Dispute Issue Identification 2 · thuyran
Dispute-issue identification means, after legal-element extraction, extracting the issues in dispute from the legal facts and further converting case relationships into questions of legal relationship. It can exclude undisputed matters and effectively focus subsequent analysis on the parties' disputed facts, evidence, and application of law. By further refining disputed issues through fact investigation and evidence review, one can approach the essence of the dispute more deeply and analyze the case more thoroughly.

0
installs
▌
Judgment Document Generation 2 · thuyran
Based on a case-fact narrative, coordinate and invoke 8 atomic capabilities to generate a complete criminal judgment that is format-compliant and rigorously reasoned. Covers the full pipeline of fact-finding, legal application, sentencing reasoning, and document output.

0
installs
▌
Legal Document Summarization 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when a structured summary is needed for judgments, rulings, mediation statements, arbitral awards, administrative penalty decisions, and other legal instruments. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - The user asks for a summary of a legal instrument, extraction of key points, or generation of a holding / ratio abstract - The user needs to convert multiple legal instruments into standardized summaries that are comparable and searchable - The user asks to extract case information, issues in dispute, legal authorities, or reasoning - The user needs summary materials for case studies, litigation analysis, or teaching preparation - The user asks to distinguish summary emphases across document types (judgment / ruling / mediation / arbitration / administrative penalty) Core value of this skill: On the basis of fidelity to the original text, convert lengthy legal instruments into concise, objective, structured summaries that highlight core content and avoid restating the ful

0
installs
▌
Multi Document Summarization 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when multiple related documents need comprehensive analysis, extraction of shared views, identification of conflicts, and generation of a unified overview. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - The user uploads multiple judgments or rulings and asks for a summary of key holdings in similar cases - The user provides multiple contract texts and asks for a comparison of clause similarities/differences and key variances - The user provides multiple statutes, regulations, or judicial interpretations and asks for a review of normative evolution and application points - The user provides multiple pieces of evidence or investigation transcripts and asks for an integrated factual narrative - The user provides multiple academic papers or research reports and asks for research consensus and disagreements - The user asks to compare viewpoint differences across multiple legal opinions Core value of this skill: not merely compressing a single document, but building cross-document r

0
installs
▌
Administrative Value Judgment 2 · thuyran
Assist legal staff of administrative organs in mainland China, based on a given administrative fact pattern, in making value judgments and interest balancing under the basic principles of administrative law, and in forming a provisional discretionary conclusion.

0
installs
▌
Billing And Litigation Budget 2 · thuyran
Use this skill when the user needs to track or manage attorney hours, expert fees, and investigation costs; control litigation spend; or prepare timesheets or expense statements for clients. Typical trigger scenarios include, but are not limited to: - Mentions of keywords such as "billable hours," "expert fees," "investigation costs," "case costs," "timesheet," "expense statement," "budget," or "cost control" - Questions about a particular attorney's hours, a matter's case costs, or litigation spend - Requests to deliver attorney hour summaries, case timesheets, or case expense statements for client delivery or reimbursement - Need to prepare a budget, monitor budget execution, or analyze budget variance for a matter or ongoing (retainer) legal services (常法服务) - Need to assess litigation cost versus expected benefit and perform litigation economics analysis

0
installs
▌
Legal Interpretation Argument 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when legal reasoning encounters any of the following: (1) the statutory text is ambiguous or admits multiple readings; (2) applying the provision to concrete case facts is contested; (3) an argument is needed that a provision should / should not apply to a particular situation; (4) the parties disagree on the meaning of the same provision; (5) provisions appear to conflict on the surface and must be reconciled through interpretation; (6) novel facts cannot be mapped directly onto existing statutory text; (7) legal application in a judgment document must be analyzed or challenged. The core of this skill is to apply textual (grammatical), systematic, teleological, and other methods of legal interpretation to rigorously interpret and argue key provisions, reach a reasonable and defensible legal meaning, and present the interpretive process and conclusion in a standardized form.

0
installs
▌
Strategic Risk Prioritization 2 · thuyran
When legal analysis yields multiple possible conclusions, risk points, or disputed issues, these risks must be systematically ranked by probability of occurrence and degree of impact so decision-makers can focus on the most critical risks and allocate resources rationally. Trigger this skill when: (1) legal due diligence finds multiple compliance risks that need ranking; (2) litigation strategy requires assessing likelihood and consequences of multiple adverse conclusions; (3) transaction structuring requires identifying and ordering key legal obstacles; (4) contract review finds multiple risk clauses that need modification priority; (5) regulatory compliance assessment requires graded management of multiple violation risks; (6) any scenario requiring strategic trade-offs among legal risks under limited resources.

0
installs
▌
Structured Element Extraction 2 · thuyran
When the AI agent must systematically analyze a legal question, case facts, legal provision, or legal relationship, it must first decompose it into a structured element checklist. Trigger this skill when: - A description of case facts is received and all legal elements must be extracted before analysis - Determining whether a legal relationship is established (e.g., contract formation, tort composition, crime composition) - Comparing similarities and differences among two or more legal facts or provisions - As a pre-quality gate before downstream tasks such as legal reasoning, application of law, or legal advice - The user expressly asks to "list elements," "analyze item by item," or "check for omissions" Core goal: ensure element extraction is complete and without omission, forming a traceable, verifiable structured checklist before allowing the next stage of reasoning. It is the "quality gate" in the legal analysis chain.

0
installs
▌
Normative Meaning Argumentation 2 · thuyran
Analyze the purpose and value orientation of legal norms, and how facts should enter normative evaluation; determine the limits of subsumption (涵摄). Distinguish this appropriately from teleological / normative-purpose interpretation within legal interpretation.

0
installs
▌
Internal Compliance Risk Identification 2 · thuyran
Trigger this skill when a systematic review of an enterprise’s internal compliance management system is needed to identify gaps in policies, process defects, and data-privacy compliance risks. Typical triggers include, without limitation: - An enterprise engaging counsel or a compliance adviser for an internal compliance risk assessment - Pre-IPO, M&A, or regulatory-inspection self-checks - After a compliance incident, when systemic defects in the management system must be investigated - When building or updating a compliance management system and assessing fit between existing policies and laws/regulations - When the user asks to review internal rules, core business processes, or privacy policy/agreements for compliance This skill covers three review dimensions: completeness of the policy system, effectiveness of business-process controls, and personal-information-protection compliance.

0
installs
▌
Trial Scheduling And Deadline Monitoring 2 · thuyran
Use this skill when the user needs to track or be reminded of hearing schedules, enforcement schedules, evidence-submission deadlines, appeal deadlines, service deadlines, preservation renewal, and other statutory procedural time limits. Typical triggers include but are not limited to: - Mentions of keywords such as “上诉期限” (appeal period), “证据提交期限” (evidence-submission deadline), “送达期限” (service deadline), “保全期限” (preservation period) - Adding, modifying, or inquiring about case deadlines

0
installs
▌
Case Retrieval · thuyran bundle
当用户需要查找与当前法律问题相关的类似案例、相关判决、裁判规则时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括：用户明确要求查找类似案例或判例；需要通过既往裁判支撑法律论点；进行案件预判需要参考同类判决；撰写法律文书需要引用权威案例；分析某一法律问题的司法实践趋势；对比不同法院、不同时期对同一问题的裁判立场。关键词包括但不限于：类似案例、相关判决、判例检索、裁判规则、同类案件、指导性案例、典型案例、司法观点、裁判要旨等。

0
installs
▌
Legal Terminology · thuyran
当AI智能体在生成、审查或修改任何法律文本（包括但不限于合同、诉状、法律意见书、裁判文书、法规释义、法律备忘录等）时，需要确保其中使用的法律术语措辞准确、无歧义、符合法律文体要求。该技能在以下场景触发： 1. 起草或修改法律文书时，需要选择正确的法律术语； 2. 审查法律文本时，发现术语使用不规范、混淆或存在歧义； 3. 将日常用语转化为法律规范表达时； 4. 翻译或对照中外法律术语时； 5. 用户明确要求对法律文本进行术语规范化处理时； 6. 对法律概念进行精确定义或解释时。本技能是法律写作的基础原子能力，贯穿所有法律文本生产环节。

0
installs
▌
Conflict Resolution · thuyran
当AI智能体在法律推理过程中遇到以下情形时触发本技能：(1)多个法律条文均可适用于同一事实（法条竞合）；(2)不同证据之间存在矛盾或不一致（证据矛盾）；(3)案件存在多个争议焦点需要确定审理或分析顺序（争点优先级排序）；(4)不同法律渊源（法律、法规、司法解释、地方性法规等）对同一问题作出不同规定（法源冲突）；(5)当事人主张与法律适用之间存在张力需要协调。本技能是法律推理的核心枢纽能力，几乎所有复杂法律分析都会涉及某种形式的冲突解决。

0
installs
▌
Deductive Reasoning · thuyran
基于形式逻辑执行严密的法律演绎推理。当用户要求"分析案件逻辑"、"验证法律推理"、"提取三段论"、"梳理案件事实与法条的关系"或"判断法律论证的有效性"时使用本技能。为用户提供基于形式逻辑的法律推理框架，将非结构化的法律规范与案件事实转化为有效、可检验、可复现的演绎论证链条（P-F-C）。

0
installs
▌
Evidence Evaluation · thuyran
当需要对案件中的证据材料进行真实性、合法性、关联性（证据"三性"）及证明力评估时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 当事人或代理人提交证据后，需要判断该证据能否被法庭采纳 - 对方当事人对己方证据提出质证意见，需要进行回应和分析 - 需要对全案证据进行综合评判，确定待证事实是否成立 - 需要判断证据是否达到相应的证明标准（如高度盖然性、排除合理怀疑等） - 需要识别证据链中的薄弱环节并提出补强建议 - 电子数据、鉴定意见、证人证言等特殊证据形式的效力判断 - 非法证据排除的识别与论证

0
installs
▌
Inductive Reasoning · thuyran
当需要从一个或多个具体案例、判决、事实模式中提炼、总结出一般性法律规则、裁判规则或法律原则时，触发此技能。典型触发场景包括：用户要求从系列案例中归纳裁判要旨、从个案中提炼可推广的法律命题、从多个事实模式中识别共同法律规则、构建类案检索的裁判规则摘要、以及从实务判例中总结司法适用标准。

0
installs
▌
Analogical Reasoning · thuyran
当AI智能体需要处理以下情形时触发本技能： 1. 当前案件/问题在现行法律中没有直接、明确的规定（法律漏洞）； 2. 需要参考已有判例、相似案件或相近法律规范来推导当前问题的处理方案； 3. 用户明确要求"参照""比照""类推适用"某一规范或案例； 4. 在法律论证中需要以"相似案件相似处理"（Like cases should be treated alike）原则支撑结论； 5. 需要评估两个或多个案件/规范之间的相似性与差异性，以判断能否进行类比； 6. 在合同解释、侵权责任认定、行政处罚裁量等场景中，需要借助类似情形的处理经验形成论证。本技能的核心是：识别相似性基础（tertium comparationis），论证类比的正当性，并在此基础上得出合理的法律结论。

0
installs
▌
Legal Risk Assessment · thuyran
从许可资质、监管法规遵循及历史处罚记录四个维度评估企业面临的监管处罚风险。

0
installs
▌
Other Legal Retrieval · thuyran
当智能体需要检索法律条文、司法解释、典型案例之外的辅助性法律信息时触发此技能。具体包括但不限于：立法背景资料（草案说明、审议报告、立法机关答记者问）、监管案例与行政处罚决定、地方指导意见与会议纪要、部门规章的起草说明与政策解读、行业标准与技术规范、法律实施情况报告、人大常委会执法检查报告、白皮书与政策文件、学术通说与权威教材观点、域外法律比较资料等。当用户问题涉及'为什么这样规定''立法目的是什么''实践中监管部门怎么处理''地方上有什么特殊规定''行业惯例是什么'等语境时，应当触发本技能。

0
installs
▌
Case Lifecycle Planning · thuyran
案件全周期规划技能。当用户需要规划案件准备时间线、创建或询问案件准备时间节点、生成案件诉讼路线图和关键时间一览表时触发。典型触发关键词："案件准备""案件准备规划""案件准备时间线""规划案件准备节奏""排开庭"。不处理案件向律师的分配，也不处理与案件管理无关的一般性编程任务。

0
installs
▌
Evidence Argument Chain · thuyran
当需要将案件中的多项证据与法律论证主张进行系统性对应挂钩时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括：准备诉讼文书（起诉状、答辩状、代理词）时需要构建完整的证据-主张对应关系；庭审前整理证据目录并明确每项证据的证明目的；对方提出反驳后需要重新组织证据链以回应；案件涉及多个争议焦点，需要将证据分组归类到不同论证主张下；需要评估现有证据是否足以支撑全部主张，识别证据链中的薄弱环节和缺口。本技能的核心是建立"主张→要件→证据→证明力评估"的完整映射关系，确保每个法律主张都有充分的证据支撑，每项证据都有明确的证明目的，整体论证链条逻辑严密、层次清晰。

0
installs
▌
Judicial Value Judgment · thuyran
辅助法官在权利冲突、法律不确定、比例原则审查和裁量说理场景中，进行结构化、可审查、可论证的司法价值判断。本 Skill 用于辅助法官在疑难案件中识别法律价值冲突、确定裁量边界、展开价值衡量，并形成可用于裁判说理的分析框架，不替代法官作出最终裁判，而是帮助法官将价值判断转化为有事实基础、规范基础和论证结构的司法推理过程。

0
installs
▌
Legal Article Retrieval · thuyran bundle
生成标准化法律检索报告，适用于案例检索、法条检索、类案分析等法律研究场景。当用户需要进行行业或专业分析、预测裁判结果、复核法律依据的有效性、确认请求、抗辩主张的法律依据、分析司法实践倾向等任务时使用。支持诉讼方案评估、庭审准备、合规审查、法律培训等各类法律实务场景。

0
installs
▌
Counterfactual Reasoning · thuyran
当需要评估'如果某一事实/行为/条件不存在或发生改变，法律结果将如何不同'时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括：因果关系认定（若无该行为，损害是否仍会发生）、过错与责任比例划分、损害赔偿范围确定、合同违约损失计算、行政行为合法性假设检验、刑事因果关系中断判断、立法影响评估等。核心方法是构建一个与现实世界仅在目标变量上不同的'反事实世界'，比较两个世界的结果差异，从而得出目标变量对结果的贡献程度。

0
installs
▌
Formal Legal Consequence · thuyran
当需要根据已确认的法律事实、已识别的法律关系和已匹配的法律规范，推导出具体的法律后果（包括但不限于民事责任类型与范围、损害赔偿金额计算、刑事刑期确定、行政处罚种类与幅度、合同效力状态等）时，触发本技能。典型触发场景包括： - 用户询问"我能获得多少赔偿""对方要承担什么责任" - 用户询问"这个行为会判几年""罚款多少" - 需要从法律构成要件满足情况推导出具体法律效果 - 需要计算具体赔偿数额、刑期范围、违约金数额等量化结果 - 需要综合考虑加重、减轻、免除等调整因素后得出最终法律后果本技能是法律推理链条的终端环节，将抽象的法律规范转化为具体的、可操作的法律结论。

0
installs
▌
Legal Element Extraction · thuyran
当需要从案件描述、当事人陈述、聊天记录、媒体报道等非结构化文本中提取具有法律意义的事实时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 用户提供一段日常语言的案件描述，要求提取法律事实 - 用户要求将口语化、情绪化的叙事转化为法律分析可用的事实结构 - 用户要求区分案件叙述中的"客观事实""主观判断"和"法律评价" - 用户要求将提取的事实对应到特定法律关系的构成要件 - 用户要求整理案件时间轴或制作事实梳理表 - 用户要求将生活语言转化为法律语言（如"他一直拖着不还"→"履行期限届满后未履行"）本技能的核心价值：将混杂的生活叙事整理为可进入法律推理的事实结构，是法律分析的前置步骤。

0
installs
▌
Legal Abductive Reasoning · thuyran
法律溯因推理（Abductive Reasoning）技能，用于在证据不完整、事实模糊时生成并评估最合理的解释性假设。结合米尔五法（求同、求异、求同求异、剩余、共变）进行结构化因果推断。当用户需要"提出可能的法律解释"、"生成辩护/起诉假设"、"评估证据的多种解读"或"基于不完整事实推断最佳解释"时触发。适用于案例分析、证据评估、规则适用争议、因果关系推断等场景。

0
installs
▌
Legal Document Formatting · thuyran
基于中国人民法院裁判文书制作规范，起草完整的民事判决书或刑事判决书。当用户要求"起草判决书"、"生成裁判文书"、"写民事判决书"、"写刑事判决书"、"根据案卷写文书"或提供案卷材料要求输出裁判文书时使用本技能，在起草各段落时自主调用原子技能（如争议焦点识别、法条检索、演绎推理、证据效力评估等）。

0
installs
▌
Legal Judgment Prediction · thuyran
根据案件事实描述，综合调用8个原子能力，预测罪名、适用法条、刑期及量刑情节，输出结构化预测报告及置信度评估。

0
installs
▌
Legal Norm Validity Check · thuyran bundle
当AI智能体在法律推理过程中检索到具体法律条文后，需要对该法条进行效力验证时触发此技能。触发条件包括但不限于： 1. 智能体引用任何法律条文作为推理依据前； 2. 用户提供法条要求分析其适用性时； 3. 多个法律规范可能存在冲突需要判断优先适用时； 4. 法律文件的时间效力存疑（可能已被修订、废止）时； 5. 需要确认某规范性文件是否具有法律约束力时； 6. 跨层级、跨区域法律规范适用产生疑问时。本技能确保智能体引用的每一条法律规范均为现行有效、层级正确、与上位法及同位法无冲突，从而保障法律推理结论的可靠性和权威性。

0
installs
▌
Systematic Interpretation · thuyran
体系解释是指针对法律规范文义解释后所产生的含义或适用范围上的争议，根据法律规范在法律体系中的位置（如在哪一部法律、编、章或节），关联的法律规范的含义，或者法律作为一个体系的应由之意，做出最符合体系性的解释，从而明确体系视角下法律规范的含义与适用范围。触发条件（满足任一即可调用）：

0
installs
▌
Argument Chain Construction · thuyran
当AI智能体需要将法律推理结果组织为完整、自洽、有说服力的论证结构时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 撰写法律意见书、代理词、辩护词、答辩状等法律文书中的论证部分 - 回答用户提出的复杂法律问题，需要多步骤推理并呈现结论 - 对争议焦点进行系统性分析，需要构建从事实到法律到结论的完整推理路径 - 反驳对方观点时，需要构建替代性论证链条 - 对多个法律问题进行综合分析，需要确保各论证之间逻辑一致、互不矛盾 - 在法律研究备忘录中呈现分析结论触发信号关键词：论证、分析、推理、为什么、证明、理由、论述、阐述观点、法律分析

0
installs
▌
Legal Concept Comprehension · thuyran
当用户要求解释、辨析、拆解或理解某个法律概念时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 用户直接询问"什么是XX""如何理解XX" - 用户要求比较两个法律概念的异同（如"不当得利与无因管理的区别"） - 用户给出具体事实，询问是否构成某法律概念（如"甲误将钱转给乙，是否构成不当得利？"） - 用户在法律分析、文书写作、合同审查中遇到不熟悉的术语 - 用户要求拆解某概念的构成要件或分析其法律效果本技能是法律分析的基础单元，为法律规则适用、案件分析、法律文书写作等提供概念基础。

0
installs
▌
Teleological Interpretation · thuyran
目的解释技能。当法律条文经过文义解释后仍无法得出确定结论时，通过系统性地发现并论证该条文的目的，在文本可承受范围内选择最正当的含义，形成可裁判的解释结论。触发条件（满足任一即可）：文义解释存在两种以上可能无法择一；文义解释结论明显不合理；条文含开放性评价概念（如"合理""正当""必要""重大"）；条文较旧、面对新型事实时文义覆盖不足。

0
installs
▌
Argument Strength Evaluation · thuyran
当AI智能体完成一段法律推理或论证后，需要对该推理结论进行自我评估，判断论证的整体强度与置信度，识别并标注推理链条中的薄弱环节。触发条件包括但不限于： - 完成法律分析后需要给出结论可靠性评级 - 用户明确要求评估某一论证的说服力或可靠性 - 存在多个竞争性法律解释需要比较论证强度 - 推理过程中涉及不确定因素（事实不明、法律空白、争议观点）需要标注 - 为决策者提供风险提示，说明结论的局限性 - 对己方或对方的法律论证进行攻防强度评估 - 在法律意见书、备忘录等文书中需要附加置信度说明

0
installs
▌
Dispute And Performance Risk · thuyran
当用户提交合同文本、交易安排、商业协议或法律关系描述，需要评估其中可能产生法律纠纷或违约风险时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 用户要求审查合同并指出潜在风险 - 用户询问某项交易安排是否存在履约障碍 - 用户描述合同执行中的困难，需要判断是否构成违约 - 用户要求对合同条款进行风险评级 - 用户提供两方或多方之间的协议，要求识别可能的争议焦点 - 用户描述已发生的履约偏差，需要评估法律后果 - 合同审查、尽职调查、交易谈判等场景中需要前瞻性风险识别此技能聚焦于"是否会产生法律纠纷"和"是否存在违约风险"两大核心问题，输出结构化的风险清单与应对建议。

0
installs
▌
Dispute Issue Identification · thuyran
争议焦点识别是指在法律要素提取之后，从法律事实中提取争议焦点，进一步将案件关系转化为法律关系问题。能够排除无争议事项，能够有效围绕当事人争议的事实、证据和法律适用等焦点问题进行后续分析。通过事实调查、证据审查等梳理再次确定争议焦点，可更加深入和靠近争议焦点的本质，将案件剖析的更加充分和透彻。

0
installs
▌
Judgment Document Generation · thuyran
根据案件事实描述，协调调用8个原子能力，生成格式规范、论证严密的完整刑事判决书。涵盖事实认定、法律适用、量刑推理及文书输出全流程。

0
installs
▌
Legal Document Summarization · thuyran
当需要对判决书、裁定书、调解书、仲裁裁决书、行政处罚决定书等法律文书进行结构化摘要时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 用户要求对一份法律文书做摘要、提炼要点或生成裁判要旨 - 用户需要将多份法律文书转化为可对比、可检索的标准化摘要 - 用户要求提取案件信息、争议焦点、法律依据或说理过程 - 用户需要为案例研究、诉讼分析、教学备课准备摘要材料 - 用户要求区分不同文书类型（判决/裁定/调解/仲裁/行政处罚）的摘要重点本技能的核心价值：在忠实于原文的基础上，将冗长法律文书转化为简明、客观、结构化的摘要，突出核心内容，避免复述全文和主观评价。

0
installs
▌
Multi Document Summarization · thuyran
当需要对多份相关文档进行综合分析、提取共同观点、识别冲突并生成统一概览时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 用户上传多份判决书、裁定书，要求总结类案裁判要旨 - 用户提供多个合同文本，要求归纳条款异同和关键差异 - 用户提供多份法律法规、司法解释，要求梳理规范演变和适用要点 - 用户提供多个证据材料、调查笔录，要求整合事实脉络 - 用户提供多篇学术论文、研究报告，要求提炼研究共识和分歧 - 用户要求对比多份法律意见书的观点差异本技能的核心价值：不是简单压缩单篇文档，而是构建跨文档的关联分析，识别共性与差异，生成新的综合性洞见。

0
installs
▌
Administrative Value Judgment · thuyran
辅助中国大陆行政机关法律工作人员，根据一段行政案情，按行政法基本原则进行价值判断、利益衡量，并形成倾向性裁量结论。

0
installs
▌
Billing And Litigation Budget · thuyran
当用户需要统计、管理律师工时、专家费用、调查费用，控制诉讼成本、向客户出具工时单或费用单时使用此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 提到"工作小时""专家费用""调查费用""办案成本""工时单""费用单""预算""成本控制"等关键词 - 询问某一律师的工作小时、某一案件的办案费用或诉讼成本时 - 用户要求交付律师工作时长总结或办案工时单、办案费用单，用于交付客户或申请报销时 - 需要对某一案件或常法服务进行预算编制、预算执行监控或预算偏差分析时 - 需要评估诉讼成本与预期收益，进行诉讼经济性分析时

0
installs
▌
Legal Interpretation Argument · thuyran
当法律推理过程中遇到以下情形时触发本技能：（1）法条文本含义模糊、存在多种理解可能；（2）法条适用于具体案件事实时产生争议；（3）需要论证某一法条应当/不应当适用于特定情形；（4）当事人双方对同一法条的理解存在分歧；（5）法条之间存在表面冲突，需要通过解释协调；（6）新型案件事实无法直接对应既有法条文本；（7）需要对裁判文书中的法律适用进行分析或质疑。本技能的核心是运用文义解释、体系解释、目的解释等法律解释方法，对关键法条进行严谨的解释论证，得出合理、可辩护的法律含义，并以规范化的方式呈现解释过程与结论。

0
installs
▌
Strategic Risk Prioritization · thuyran
当法律分析中存在多个可能的结论、风险点或争议焦点时，需要对这些风险按照发生概率和影响程度进行系统化排序，以帮助决策者聚焦最关键的风险并合理分配资源。该技能在以下场景触发：(1)法律尽职调查中发现多项合规风险需要排序；(2)诉讼策略制定中需要评估多个不利结论的可能性与后果；(3)交易结构设计中需要识别并排列关键法律障碍；(4)合同审查中发现多个风险条款需要确定修改优先级；(5)监管合规评估中需要对多项违规风险进行分级管理；(6)任何需要在有限资源下对法律风险进行战略性取舍的场景。

0
installs
▌
Structured Element Extraction · thuyran
当AI智能体需要对一个法律问题、案件事实、法律条文或法律关系进行系统性分析时，首先必须将其分解为结构化的要素清单。该技能在以下场景触发： - 接收到一段案件事实描述，需要提取全部法律要素后再进行分析 - 需要判断某一法律关系是否成立（如合同成立、侵权构成、犯罪构成） - 需要对比两个或多个法律事实/条文的异同 - 在进入法律推理、法律适用、法律建议等下游任务之前，作为前置质量关卡 - 用户明确要求"列出要素""逐项分析""检查是否遗漏" 本技能的核心目标是：确保要素提取完整、无遗漏，形成可追溯、可验证的结构化清单，然后才允许进入下一阶段推理。它是法律分析链条中的"质量闸门"。

0
installs
▌
Normative Meaning Argumentation · thuyran
分析法律规范的目的、价值导向，以及事实应如何进入规范评价，判断涵摄的限度，需要适当区别于法律解释中的规范目的解释。

0
installs
▌
Internal Compliance Risk Identification · thuyran
当需要对企业内部的合规管理体系进行系统性审查，识别制度缺漏、流程缺陷和数据隐私合规风险时触发此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 企业委托律师或合规顾问进行内部合规风险评估 - 企业拟上市、并购或接受监管检查前进行合规自查 - 发生合规事件后，需要排查管理体系中的系统性缺陷 - 企业建立或更新合规管理体系时，需要评估现有制度与法律法规的匹配度 - 用户要求审查企业内部规章制度、核心业务流程或隐私政策协议的合规性本技能覆盖三大审查维度：制度体系完整性审查、业务流程控制有效性审查、个人信息保护合规性审查。

0
installs
▌
Trial Scheduling And Deadline Monitoring · thuyran
当用户需要跟踪、被提醒案件的开庭排期、执行排期、证据提交期限、上诉期限、送达期限、保全续保等各项法定期限时，使用此技能。典型触发场景包括但不限于： - 提到"上诉期限""证据提交期限""送达期限""保全期限"等关键词 - 增加、修改、询问案件期限时

0
installs

76 published skills