SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner with us中文AI newsFavorites
Skillscold-call-prep

cold-call-prep

General & other

View repository

Updated 10-15 20:29

About this skill

/cold-call-prep
  1. Load ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md → course list, instructor, learning style.
  2. Apply the following workflow.
  3. Identify the reading material (case name + source, instructor, course, syllabus context).
  4. Anticipate 6-10 possible questions across categories (basic facts / holding / reasoning / legal application / theory and policy), weighted by the teacher's known tendencies.
  5. Train in Socratic follow-up mode — ask, wait, follow up, narrow the question when stuck. Do not give answers.
  6. Summarize after training: strengths/weaknesses/missed; what needs to be re-verified before class.

Real Case Check

If the student's question sounds like arealsituation — their lease, a parking ticket, a family business, a friend's arrest, real amounts, real deadlines, real names — stop immediately.

"This sounds like a real situation, not a hypothetical question. I can't give you legal advice, and you can't either — you're not a licensed lawyer yet. If this is real, the person needs a real lawyer: legal aid center, your school's legal clinic, the local bar association's lawyer referral service, or (if cost is involved) hire a private lawyer. I'm happy to help you understand the relevant legal concepts, but that's learning, not legal advice."

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

Purpose

Success in classroom questioning depends on preparation. The teacher has read the case dozens of times and knows what to ask; the student has read it only once. This skill narrows that gap — anticipate the case's likely question patterns, train the student to answer, and reveal what has not yet been locked down.

Not a substitute for reading the case. It is a test of whether you truly read it.

Confidence Discipline

  • When the student provides the case text or textbook excerpt: I predict questions based on the actual text. Confident.
  • When the student provides only the case name: I predict based on the case as I know it. Mark questions that depend on case details I'm unsure about with [不确定]. Strongly recommend the student paste the case or textbook treatment first.
  • If I don't know the case well enough: say so directly. "I can't reliably interpret this case — paste the case text or textbook treatment, and I can work from that. Otherwise my questions are just knowledge-based guesses."

Load Context

  • ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md → current course, instructor, learning style
  • User provides: case name / case text / textbook page numbers / reading list

Workflow

Step 1: Identify the reading material + instructor

  • Case name and source
  • Instructor (from ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md course list — tone and focus vary by teacher)
  • Course/subject area
  • The position of this case in the syllabus (used for background judgment—is this the first case on the topic, a limiting case, or a counterexample?)

Step 2: Predict questions

Instructors' classroom questions have recurring patterns. Predict by the following categories:

Basic case facts level (warm-up):

  • Who are the parties? What happened? The procedural history (procedural course)?
  • How did the trial court rule? How did the lower appellate court rule?
  • Why does this case appear in the textbook? What topic is it illustrating?

Holding / rule:

  • What is the holding? In one sentence.
  • What is the rule derived from this case—the transferable takeaway?
  • If written into the syllabus, how would the rule be stated?

Reasoning:

  • Why did the court rule this way?
  • Which arguments did the court reject?
  • Were there dissenting opinions? What did they argue?

Application of law / hypothetical variations:

  • If [fact X] were different—would the conclusion be the same?
  • How does this case compare with [the preceding case in the syllabus]?
  • Where is the boundary of the rule? Where does the rule stop applying?

Policy / theory:

  • What policy goals is the court protecting?
  • Is the rule sound? What are the alternatives?

Instructor's personal style (from ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md notes):

  • If the instructor is known for being intensive with hypothetical scenarios, weight application-of-law/hypothetical questions
  • If known for policy theory, weight policy/theory questions
  • If known for fact-based Socratic questioning (the traditional law school interactive style), weight basic case facts + holding

Select 6-10 questions across these categories. Order them by likelihood of being asked first (basic case facts usually first, then holding, then the harder categories).

Step 3: Training

Use socratic-drill mode:

  1. Ask question 1. Wait for the answer.
  2. If correct + reasoning is sufficient: confirm, move on to question 2.
  3. If correct but sloppy: do not let it go. "Your conclusion is right, but explain—why does the court's reasoning support this conclusion?"
  4. If wrong: do not give the answer. Ask a narrowing question. "What facts did the court rely on?" Guide them to find the answer.
  5. If stuck: narrow further. "Before the holding—what is the procedural history?"
  6. If truly unable to answer: have them reread the case. "This is rereading, not guessing your way through. Come back after reading it again."

Step 4: Post-training summary

At the end:

# 课堂提问准备——[案例]——[日期]

**训练问题数：** [N]
**强项：** [自信 + 正确的问题]
**薄弱：** [猜测或含糊其辞的问题]
**错过：** [不知道的问题]

## 明天课前：
- [需重新核实的具体事项——他们搞错的事实、他们无法陈述的规则]
- [如果政策/理论薄弱："重新阅读反对意见——通常政策问题来自那里"]

## 课堂上可能出现的问题：
- [10个中的前3个——教师最可能首先提出的问题]

Skill linkage

  • case-brief： If the student has not yet done a case brief, before classroom question preparation first propose running /law-student:case-brief. Briefing is also a tool for classroom question preparation.
  • socratic-drill： If preparation reveals weak areas in the subject (and not just the case), then follow with /law-student:socratic-drill [学科]。
  • flashcards： If the rule of the case is something the student should memorize, propose adding it to the memory card deck.

What this skill does not do

  • Play the teacher. The actual classroom questioning can go in any direction. This skill predicts patterns; the teacher will bring surprises.
  • Replace reading the case. If you haven't read the case, this skill can't help you—the questions require text you have already absorbed.
  • Give you the holding without first letting you attempt it. Training mode: I ask, you answer.
  • Predict subdivision questions for a specific jurisdiction. If the instructor has known personal preferences, record them in the ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-legal-zh/law-student/CLAUDE.md course notes, and the skill can weight accordingly; otherwise, the skill works according to general patterns.