如何將 Claude 用作法律助理:Victoria Skill 指南

Updated
Skill · .md

本指南背後的 Skill:Victoria - Legal Assistant AI Skill。在 Claude、ChatGPT 或任何 AI 聊天工具中草擬、摘要和整理法律文件 - $79,永久歸你所有。

查看 Victoria Skill →

法律工作都埋藏在文件裡:需要摘要的合約、需要比較的條款、需要草擬的信件、需要追蹤的期限。單純的聊天機器人 prompt 會自信地摘要合約,卻漏掉真正重要的條款 - 或更糟的是,將法律陳述得彷彿已經確立。善用 Claude 作為法律助理,就代表把它視為快速而謹慎的起草者與整理者,而不是神諭。真正的 AI 法律助理知道行政工作與法律建議之間的界線。

Victoria 就是那位助理。她是一個法律支援角色,只要載入 Claude、ChatGPT 或任何 AI 聊天工具一次即可使用,而且會堅守這條界線的正確一側:她會草擬、摘要、比較和整理,並標示任何需要合格律師處理的事項,而不是假裝自己就是律師。她的價值在於加快文件處理速度,同時將判斷留給應該負責的人。

標記為供律師審閱的草稿
Victoria - 法律助理 AI Skill
Victoria - 法律助理 AI Skill
$79這個 Skill 相較於 $100每小時,法律助理

Victoria 會草擬、摘要並比較合約條款,標示任何需要合格律師處理的事項 - 一次性價格,而不是按小時收取的法律助理費率。

查看 Victoria →

為什麼通用 AI 法律協助具有風險

沒有明確引導時,聊天機器人會捏造看似真實、實際上並不存在的判例和引文。它會用法律很少值得擁有的自信陳述法律,因為某條款讀起來和其他條款一樣,就略過合約中實質重要的條款,而且完全沒有管轄區概念 - 用美國的假設回答英格蘭法律問題。在法律工作中,自信卻錯誤的答案是代價最高的那種。

Victoria Skill 帶來的改變

Victoria 會在開始前詢問管轄區和文件類型。她能清楚地摘要合約並比較條款、草擬信件和初稿協議,也會標示值得仔細檢視的條款與風險。更重要的是,她會標明何時某件事從行政工作跨入法律建議的範圍,應交由律師處理 - 絕不會把猜測包裝成已確立的法律。

實際上它會產出什麼

合約摘要、逐條款比較、信件與協議的初稿、文件檢查清單、以白話解釋法律術語,以及從文件中擷取的截止日期與行動清單。把一份協議交給她,她會告訴你其中內容以及需要提出哪些疑問;但她不會告訴你簽署是否安全。

如何充分發揮其效用

請一開始就說明司法管轄區,因為這會改變答案。與其描述文件,不如直接提供實際文件。將每項輸出都視為草稿,並在採取行動前,將任何具有實際法律後果的內容交由合格律師處理 - 她的設計目的是加快交接,而不是取代律師。

適用對象

希望更快速處理文件行政工作的律師事務所、內部法務團隊、在沒有專職律師的情況下處理合約的創辦人,以及法務助理。它適用於 Claude、ChatGPT,或任何接受 system prompt 的 AI 聊天工具。至於相關工作,法律與財務 skills 合集涵蓋研究、合規與合約 - 每項都是專注的助理,而非通用聊天機器人。Victoria 會解釋並起草文件;她不提供法律意見,而涉及法律後果的結論必須由合格的律師審閱。

Skill · .md · 適用於 Claude 和 ChatGPT

Victoria - 法律助理 AI Skill

將一份檔案放入你的 AI 中,它就能起草、摘要並整理法律文件 - 內容清晰、有條理,並標註需要合格專業人士審閱的部分。不需訂閱。永久屬於你。

$79
取得 Victoria Skill →

KissMySkills 是一個提供 1,000 多項 AI skillspromptsagents免費工具 的市集,適用於 Claude、ChatGPT 及任何 AI 聊天工具。

相關 Skill 指南

常見問題

Can Claude do legal work?+

It can do document work: drafting, summarising, comparing, organising, and preparing the questions you take to a lawyer. It cannot give legal advice, and nothing on this page is legal advice. The useful framing is that every technique ends with a qualified, accountable human. If a decision carries legal consequence it belongs to a solicitor or attorney, and the model's job is to make that handover faster and better prepared rather than to replace it.

Does AI make up case law?+

Yes, and the danger is that a fabricated citation is indistinguishable from a real one by reading. The case name, the reporter cite, the year and the holding are all plausible and on point. In June 2023 the Southern District of New York sanctioned two lawyers and their firm over a brief containing six opinions that did not exist, complete with internal citations to further cases that also did not exist. Judge Castel imposed a 5,000 dollar penalty. The instructive part is how far it got: the brief was read, filed and defended before anyone pulled the cases.

How do I check whether a citation is real?+

Mechanically, never by reading. Open every authority in a real database and read it, or it does not go in the document. Skimming for plausibility is exactly the check that fails, because plausibility is what the output is optimised for. A useful discipline is to make the model list every authority that appeared in the conversation in a table, marked UNVERIFIED, with the specific source to check each one against, and to refuse to mark any row verified even if you tell it to.

Will it misquote a contract I gave it myself?+

It can, and this is the risk people miss. Most assume hallucination only affects outside knowledge, but a summary of a document you supplied is still generated text and it can drift: a shall that was a may, a notice period taken from a different sub-clause, a carve-out that is not there. This is more dangerous than an invented case because you trust it more. The fix is a locator on every line - clause or section number - and an instruction to flag anything it cannot locate rather than smooth over it.

Why does jurisdiction matter so much?+

Because these tools have read overwhelmingly more American legal text than anything else and do not announce it. Ask an English-law question and you may get American assumptions in English-sounding prose, with the vocabulary drifting silently: discovery for disclosure, statute of limitations for limitation period, consideration doctrine where it does not belong, at-will employment assumed in a jurisdiction that never had it. Within a jurisdiction the law also has a date, and the model does not know what changed last month.

Can AI tell me whether a contract is safe to sign?+

No, and asking is the mistake. Whether a question is administrative or advisory depends on facts the model does not have and consequences it cannot see, so it cannot police that boundary however it is built. Put the burden in how you ask instead: never whether something is safe, enforceable or advisable, always what the document says, what is unusual in it, and what to put to a lawyer. That second kind of question has an answer it can actually produce.

Is it safe to paste client documents into an AI chat?+

Settle it before the workflow rather than inside it. For lawyers, the ABA's Formal Opinion 512 of 29 July 2024 is its first ethics guidance on generative AI: competence under Model Rule 1.1 includes understanding the technology's benefits and risks, client information is protected under Rule 1.6 and needs informed consent before disclosure, Rule 1.4 brings a duty to consult clients about the methods used, and on fees you may bill for input and review time but generally not for learning the tool. Your own jurisdiction's guidance may be stricter. Working from a redacted extract removes most of the question.

Can a non-lawyer use this for other people?+

Using it on your own documents is your business. Using it to prepare documents or give guidance for other people may be practising law without a licence, which is regulated in most jurisdictions regardless of whether money changes hands. That is worth checking before you are helpful to a friend, and it is a separate question from whether the output is any good.

~/get-started

實用的 Skills。不說空話。

瀏覽商店中的每個技能、prompt 套件和 agent。

瀏覽所有技能 →或試試免費工具