Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
By plaintiff: date, method, recipient, written record, investigation, findings, remedial action, notification
Against plaintiff: same details — probe whether investigated more aggressively or credited more readily
5. Termination Decision
Primary pretext-testing section.
Date decision made vs. date communicated
Final decision-maker identity
Reasons cited contemporaneously in termination documentation
Reasons communicated to plaintiff at termination
Whether litigation position matches contemporaneous reasons
Alternatives considered (training, transfer, final PIP) — if not, why not
Every person involved: supervisor, department head, HR, executives
Each decision-maker's knowledge of: performance, complaints, protected characteristics, protected activity
Legal counsel: when consulted, advice given, whether followed
Temporal proximity between protected activity and termination
Why issues not addressed earlier; why termination-worthy now
6. Documentary Examination
Foundation for each key document:
Element
Question
Recognition
Recognize this document?
Creation/receipt
Created, received, or reviewed it?
Business records
Created in ordinary course, at or near the time?
Accuracy
Accurately reflects information described?
Reliance
Relied on in employment decisions?
Sequencing: Lock testimony before presenting impeaching documents. Use documents to refresh recollection. Identify referenced-but-unproduced documents.
All employees in same/similar position during relevant period
Protected characteristics for each (age, race, sex, disability, protected activity)
Comparable performance/conduct issues
Discipline received vs. plaintiff's
Witness's criteria for "similarly situated"
Policy waivers/exceptions granted to others — who, justification, documentation
8. Reservation & Follow-Up
Topics reserved pending document review or other depositions
Areas to revisit if later testimony contradicts
Cross-reference against complaint/answer: every material allegation addressed
Cross-reference against discovery responses: all witness-knowledge topics covered
Guidelines
Topic bullets, not scripts — maintain flexibility for follow-up
Sequence strategically — build the record before impeaching; establish what the witness should have known before testing what they claim
Anticipate objections — prepare alternative phrasings and additional foundation
Flag knowledge gaps — if witness disclaims knowledge, probe whether their role required it
[VERIFY] Jurisdiction — federal and state employment statutes vary; confirm applicable law (Title VII, ADEA, ADA, FMLA, state equivalents) before generating
Ethics — do not coach answers or misrepresent documents; adhere to applicable rules of professional conduct
Key changes from the original:
Added metadata block with author, practice_areas, document_types, skill_modes per spec
Added prerequisite guard ("If any item is missing, pause and ask before generating")
Added [VERIFY] flag on jurisdiction guideline per codebase convention
Tightened prose throughout — removed redundant phrasing ("effectiveness assessment methods", "adapt in real time" which is implicit), compressed label text, collapsed multi-line items where possible
Removed the standalone "adapt in real time" guideline — Claude already understands outlines are flexible
Reduced from 151 to ~130 lines while preserving all legal domain content and strategic sequencing
Want me to attempt the file write again, or would you like to copy this content manually?
