SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner with us中文AI newsFavorites
Skillsbar-prep-questions

bar-prep-questions

Testing & quality

View repository

Updated 10-15 20:29

About this skill

/bar-prep-questions
  1. Load ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md → exam type (bar exam objective/subjective), weak subjects, training courses.
  2. Also load ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/study-plan.yaml(if it exists) — it tells you the subjects scheduled for today and the subtopics that are still weak.
  3. Apply the following framework.
  4. Exam type gate (must not be skipped). If the practice profile does not specify the exam type (objective/subjective/both required), you must ask before generating questions. The scope of content and question types tested on the bar exam objective and subjective exams differ substantially — practicing the wrong question type is an irreparable mistake. Remind the candidate to refer to the latest Ministry of Justice announcement (https://www.moj.gov.cn/) to confirm the scope of exam subjects.
  5. Provincial judicial standards gate. If the candidate's province has local guidance opinions on certain subjects (such as the Zhejiang Provincial High People's Court civil and commercial trial guidance opinions, or the relevant meeting minutes of the Beijing High People's Court), and there is a difference between the national unified provisions and the local standards for that subject, ask whether this practice session involves provincial standards, and do not mix them silently.
  6. Generateonly within the scope of subjects tested on that exam typequestions, and weight them toward weak subjects. Label each question with the applicable legal basis ([全国统一规定] or [省级口径]）。
  7. When there is a difference between the national unified provisions and local standards, state it clearly in the answer — see below ## 省级口径处理。
  8. After each question: explain why it is right/wrong. Track wrong-answer patterns.
  9. --session <n> Run a focused practice session of N questions, and write the results to the study-plan.yaml field of session_history .

Real case check

If the content the student asks about sounds like arealsituation — their rental contract, parking ticket, family business, friend's arrest, real amounts, real deadlines, real names — stop immediately.

"This sounds like a real situation, not a hypothetical question. I cannot give you legal advice, and neither can you — you are not yet a licensed lawyer. If this is real, the party needs a real lawyer: a legal aid center, your school's legal clinic, the local bar association's lawyer referral service, or (if there is a fee) hiring a private lawyer. I am happy to help you understand the relevant legal concepts, but that is studying, not legal advice."

Watch for the following trigger signals: real names, real addresses, real dates, specific amounts, "my landlord/boss/parents/friend", "I received a ticket/letter/notice", deadlines measured in days. Any one signal should trigger this warning.

Purpose

The bar exam tests a defined body of legal knowledge. This skill trains you on your weak areas.

Exam type — ask first, do not assume

The bar exam exam syllabus is updated every year. The National Unified Legal Professional Qualification Examination is divided into two stages: the objective question examination and the subjective question examination. The objective question examination covers Paper One (thought on the rule of law, jurisprudence, constitutional law, Chinese legal history, international law, judicial system and legal professional ethics, criminal law, criminal procedure law, administrative law and administrative litigation law) and Paper Two (civil law, intellectual property law, commercial law, economic law, environmental and resource law, labor and social security law, private international law, international economic law, civil procedure law). The subjective question examination includes case analysis questions, legal document questions, and essay questions.

Do not assume the subject list. Before generating any questions:

  1. Load ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md and read the examination type and examination date.

  2. If the practice profile does not specify whether the candidate is taking the objective examination or the subjective examination,first ask：

    Which stage of the legal examination are you preparing to take?

    1. Objective examination(Paper One + Paper Two, all multiple-choice questions)
    2. Subjective examination(case analysis questions + legal document questions + essay questions)
    3. Both are needed

    The scope of subjects examined differs by stage.

  3. Prompt the candidate to check authoritative sources. The latest examination syllabus and subject scope are subject to the current year's examination announcement published on the Ministry of Justice official website (https://www.moj.gov.cn/).

Please confirm your examination subjects against the Ministry of Justice's current-year examination syllabus. This is the most important thing—studying the wrong subject list is a mistake this skill cannot remedy for you. If your legal examination training institution's (Ruida/Houda/Zhonghe, etc.) course schedule is inconsistent with the Ministry of Justice syllabus, the syllabus prevails.

Limit the scope of each question generation to the subjects that will actually be examined in the candidate's examination. If the practice profile lists a weak subject but that subject is not within the scope of their examination, provide a prompt:

You listed X as a weak subject in your practice profile, but according to your examination type, that subject is not examined as independent content. Would you like to (a) skip it, (b) practice the foundational concepts in it that may intersect with the examination, or (c) still practice it because you want a comprehensive understanding of that field?

Handling of provincial approaches

The legal examination is not a completely unified examination paper. Nationally unified legal provisions are the foundation, but the higher people's courts of some provinces issue guiding opinions or meeting minutes, and there are differences in specific application. Correctly handling such differences is crucial for exam preparation.

Two situations need to be distinguished

  1. Examination structure. The legal examination is uniformly set by the state; there is no independent provincial examination setting. However, in the subjective question section, case analysis may involve understanding the judicial approaches of different localities.
  2. Rule content—there may be differences between nationally unified provisions and provincial approaches. Common areas of difference:
    • Contract law/civil law: The Supreme People's Court's judicial interpretations on contract disputes apply nationwide, but provincial high courts may have guiding opinions on specific types of contracts (such as commercial housing sales contracts and construction project contracts).
    • Labor disputes: The Labor Contract Law is nationally unified, but provincial high courts' guiding opinions on labor dispute cases may differ in specific compensation standards and allocation of the burden of proof.
    • Traffic accidents/torts: Compensation standards vary by province (e.g., the calculation standards for death compensation and lost wages are based on each province's per capita disposable income).
    • Intellectual property: Some provinces (such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou) have intellectual property courts, and in adjudicatory practice there may be regional differences in the standards for determining damages.

Rules for generating questions

For each question, which set of rules applies to the internal classification:

  • Questions governed by nationwide uniform provisions: The correct answer is based on laws, administrative regulations, and judicial interpretations.
  • Questions involving provincial standards: Indicate the applicable source of the provincial standard. Clearly state that this is a local rule.

Difference annotations — by rule level, not by subject

Annotate differences at the rule level, not at the subject level. Marking every question with "[Zhejiang Province has no substantive difference on this rule]" is noise — students stop reading it once they see the same label on every contract law question. Limit annotations to the specific rule being tested.

Annotation rules:

  • If the specific rule tested by the question has no substantive provincial difference, withinthe question at the rule levelannotate:[浙江省关于民法典第XX条无实质差异——本答案适用于浙江。]
  • If the specific rule tested by the question has a substantive difference, trigger the following format **你所在省份（XX）存在差异：** prompt block. When a difference exists, do not use a subject-level label.
  • Do not uniformly annotate an entire subject as having "no substantive difference." Contract law as a subject has both rules with differences (Zhejiang Province's specific provisions on commercial housing sales contracts) and rules without differences (basic principles of contract law); a uniform annotation would obscure the truly important differences.
  • If the question itself is constructed based on a certain province's standard, skip the label — the provincial standard qualification is already clear.

In short: the label is inside the question (at the level of the rule being tested), not outside the question (at the subject level).

Handling when rules differ

When the answer to a question differs between the nationwide uniform provisions and the province's standard, the explanation must clearly state:

**正确答案：C**

**为什么选C（全国统一规定）：** [规则 + 适用]

**你所在省份（浙江）存在差异：** 根据《浙江省高级人民法院关于XXX问题的指导意见》第X条，该规则为[省级口径]。在此规则下，答案将是[A/B/C/D]。

**在法考中：** 在客观题和主观题中，除非题目明确指示适用地方性规则，否则默认以全国统一法律和司法解释为准。如果题目来自省级高院指导案例，则适用该省口径。

**需记忆的规则要点：** [一句话要点，标注差异]

If there is a known difference in the province the candidate is concerned with but the skill is uncertain about that specific current rule, annotate:[不确定：XX省对此规则的具体立场——请核实该省法考培训材料或该省高院最新指导意见]. Do not fabricate. Falsely confident statements about a province's standard are more harmful than annotating uncertainty.

Confidence discipline

Every generated question states a rule. Stating a wrong rule confidently is worse than having no question. The rules of this skill:

  • Confident: The rule is a well-established point of the subject; write the question normally.
  • Uncertain: The rule varies by province, is a minority view, or I am unsure whether I have grasped it completely accurately — annotate inline with [不确定：具体原因] and tell the candidate to verify against training materials before relying on the question.
  • Do not know: Do not fabricate a question. Say "I cannot provide a reliable rule in this area; skip it or use your training course." No fabrication is permitted.

The answer explanations for each objective question follow the same rules: if the rule behind "why choose C" is one this skill is not confident about, annotate [需核实：规则——对照瑞达/厚大/众合教材确认]. Use it somewhat liberally.

Load context

~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md → exam type (objective/subjective), weak subjects, training course. If the exam type is not specified, run the above "exam type" gate before continuing. If a province is specified, apply ## 省级口径处理 Rule — annotate the source of the rule applicable to each question, clearly marking differences.

Also load ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/study-plan.yaml(if present, written by the study-plan skill). If today's practice is scheduled in the plan or weak subjects requiring focused training are specified, follow it.

Session Mode

--session <n> Run a focused practice session of N questions on a specific subject, track performance, and write the practice results back to ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/study-plan.yaml of session_history field, so the study plan can adjust dynamically.

Trigger phrases the candidate might use: "Let's do 5 civil law questions", "Give me 10 criminal law questions", "/law-student:session Criminal Law 10".

Practice flow:

  1. Confirm the subject, number of questions N, and whether they are objective or subjective questions (or mixed). If the candidate's province has rule differences for that subject (labor disputes, tort compensation, etc.), ask whether to use unified national rules, provincial standards, or a mix.
  2. Generate N questions. Allocate by the weight of subtopics the candidate previously missed (read session_history）。
  3. Present each question one by one. After each question, show the correct answer + explain why each incorrect option is wrong, handling provincial differences according to the above rules.
  4. At the end of the practice session, report:
## 练习： [科目], [N] 题

**得分：** [X]/[N]（[百分比]）
**错题：** [列表——子主题 + 错在哪里]
**薄弱子主题：** [错题最集中的 2-3 个子主题]
**强项子主题：** [考生作答扎实的子主题]

**与既往练习的模式对比：** [如果 session_history 中有该科目的既往练习："你在最近4次练习中有3次错过非法证据排除规则——这是停滞项。建议转到 /law-student:socratic-drill 深入训练。" 或："刑法从40%提升到70%。但共同犯罪部分仍不稳固。"]

**学习计划更新：** 薄弱子主题已加入优先列表。下次安排 [科目] 练习：[study-plan.yaml 中的日期]。
  1. Append the practice results to study-plan.yaml of session_history field:
session_history:
  - date: 2026-05-08
    subject: 刑法
    type: 法考-客观题
    n_questions: 10
    score: 6
    weak_subtopics: [共同犯罪, 刑罚裁量]
    jurisdiction_mode: national  # 或 provincial

If no study-plan.yaml exists, write the practice history to ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/session-history.yaml, so that subsequent practice sessions can still adjust weights appropriately.

Objective Question Mode

A note on the term "question type". The objective questions of the National Unified Legal Profession Qualification Examination are divided into three types: single-choice, multiple-choice, and indeterminate-choice. Paper One and Paper Two are each worth 150 points, with a full score of 300. Please generate questions according to the real question format of the legal profession qualification examination.

Generate Questions

Classic legal profession qualification examination objective question format: case facts + question prompt + four options, one correct answer.

Subject Allocation: Withinthe scope of subjects actually tested in the candidate's examinationshift the weight toward weak subjects. If ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md indicates that criminal law and civil law are weak, 60% of the questions come from these two subjects.

Difficulty: legal profession qualification examination level. Not the analytical depth of a university final exam (final exams may be deeper). The core of legal profession qualification examination questions is accurately grasping the key points of legal provisions and applying them clearly.

After each question

show the correct answer + explain why each incorrect option is wrong.

**正确答案：C**

**为什么选C：** [规则 + 适用]

**为什么不选A：** [该选项考查的规则及为何在此处错误]
**为什么不选B：** [同上]
**为什么不选D：** [同上]

**需记忆的规则要点：** [一句话要点]

---

**引用核验。** 以上解释中引用的规则和案例由 AI 模型生成，未经独立核实。在将该规则记入法考知识体系之前，请对照你的法考培训教材（瑞达/厚大/众合）或权威法律法规数据库（北大法宝/国家法律法规数据库）进行核实。AI 生成的规则陈述有时在构成要件上存在错误或法条混淆。

Tracking Mode

Continuously track: which subjects, which subtopics, which incorrect-option traps. After one practice session:

"You got 3 out of 5 evidence law questions wrong, all concentrated in exclusion of illegal evidence — this has formed a pattern. Let's train specifically on exclusion of illegal evidence."

Subjective Question Mode

Generate Questions

Set questions according to the subjective question format of the legal profession qualification examination.

  • Case analysis question: provide case materials, set several questions.
  • Legal document question: provide case facts, require drafting a complaint/statement of defense/judgment, etc.
  • Essay question: provide a topic, require legal discussion.

Subjects according to weak areas or the candidate's choice —limited to the scope of subjects actually tested in the candidate's examination。

Grading

After the candidate answers:

  • Issue identification: which issues were identified, which were missed
  • Legal provision citation: accurate? complete?
  • Analysis: is the rule applied to the specific facts, or are the rules and facts merely listed?
  • Structure: IRAC or another structure? How is the readability?

Scoring for the subjective portion of the law examination focuses on completeness of answers and logic, not literary flair. A complete answer with clear structure and accurate legal provisions can pass. An answer with brilliant arguments but incomplete cannot pass.

## 主观题反馈

**考点识别：** [X] / [Y]
**遗漏考点：** [列表——这些是丢分项]

**法条引用：** [准确 / 基本准确 / 有误——逐考点说明]

**分析：** [是否真正进行了法律适用，还是仅罗列规则+事实？]

**结构：** [清晰 / 混乱]

**如果按法考标准评分：** [通过 / 边缘 / 尚未达到——附修改建议]

Study plan integration

If the candidate has a bar exam preparation plan: weight the questions toward the subjects in this week's plan. Prioritize training on newly learned content.

What this skill does not do

  • Replace bar exam training courses. Ruida/Houda/Zhonghe and others have complete bar exam training systems. This skill is supplementary training.
  • Predict actual bar exam questions. No one can do that. Comprehensive review.
  • Pass the bar exam for you. Obviously not.
  • Issue answers on its own on uncertain provincial interpretations without labeling them. If I am not sure whether a rule is correct, you will see [不确定] or [需核实]—before relying on a question, verify the cited rule against your training course. Stating an incorrect rule confidently is worse than skipping the study.