agentsclimarketplace

Compliance audit

Skill lukedj78/dev-flow/compliance-audit

A filesystem contract (.workflow/meta.json) + 37 agent skills that take a product from idea to production: web (Next.js 16) & mobile (Expo/RN), plus an eve agent engine and Linear/scrum. Runs on Claude Code, Codex, Copilot, Gemini, Cursor.

Install
npx -y skills add lukedj78/dev-flow --skill compliance-audit

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 4 stars4 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Run a GDPR + EU AI Act compliance audit on an EXISTING dev-flow project (web / mobile / eve agent) and remediate the risks it finds. Two modes: Audit (scan the codebase + `meta.json#stack` against a 10-point risk register — DSAR export/erasure, consent/cookies, EU data residency & transfers, retention/TTL & PII-scrubbing, AI-transparency Art.50, high-risk Annex III classification, sub-processors, special-category data — and write `docs/compliance/audit-report.md` with severity + file:line evidence + article mapping) and Remediate (auto-apply the SAFE, mechanical mitigations — DSAR endpoints, cookie-consent banner + privacy page, AI-disclosure, retention config, PII-scrubbing, a sub-processor register generated from `meta.json#stack` — and FLAG the decision-requiring ones as TODOs, never deciding legal basis / region / high-risk for the user). Reuses module-add / forms / design-md-to-app where possible instead of reinventing. Horizontal capability: run it any time; dev-flow proposes it as a pre-deploy gate. Records a `compliance` block in meta.json; does NOT bump phase. Triggers: "audit GDPR", "compliance check", "AI Act", "siamo conformi?", "DSAR / cancellazione account / cookie consent / data residency", or dev-flow routing before feature_complete/deploy. Not for: legal advice or a DPIA sign-off (this produces engineering findings + a DPIA template, a DPO/lawyer confirms materiality), building features (use design-md-to-app / module-add / rn-*), or writing the PRD (prd-from-idea captures the high-risk question upstream).

SKILL.md

8.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

compliance-audit — GDPR + EU AI Act audit & remediation for existing projects

Runs on a project that already exists (any dev-flow stack — Next.js web, Expo mobile, or an eve agent). It reads the codebase and .workflow/meta.json#stack, scores it against a fixed risk register, writes a report, and — on request — applies the safe mitigations while flagging the ones that need a human decision.

Not legal advice. This produces engineering findings and remediations. A DPO / qualified counsel confirms materiality, legal basis, and high-risk classification per deployment. Every generated artifact carries that caveat.

The 10-point risk register (canonical)

Full checklist + article mapping + remediation recipes in references/gdpr-ai-act-checklist.md. In short:

IDRiskGDPR / AI Act
R1No DSAR: data export / erasure (also Apple 5.1.1(v) + Play in-app account deletion)Art. 15/17/20
R2No consent capture / cookie-consent bannerArt. 6/7, ePrivacy
R3International transfer / EU data residency not addressedArt. 44+
R4No retention/TTL + no PII-scrubbing (logs, event log, caches)Art. 5(1)(e)
R5No AI-transparency disclosure; synthetic voice unlabeledAI Act Art. 50
R6High-risk use case never classified (DPIA)AI Act Annex III; GDPR Art. 35
R7PII in server/app logsArt. 32
R8Sub-processors not disclosed / no DPA registerArt. 28
R9Special-category data unguardedArt. 9
R10Memory/personalization not screened for manipulationAI Act Art. 5

Read state, then pick a mode

  1. Read .workflow/meta.json (stack.framework, auth, db, agent, deploy, …). If none, still run — infer the stack from the codebase and tell the user.
  2. Run python scripts/scan.py <project-root> for a fast first-pass signal (grep-level markers per risk). The scan is a signal, not a verdict — verify every hit by reading the file before reporting it (avoid false positives).
  3. Choose: Audit (report only) or Remediate (apply safe fixes + flag decisions). Both are idempotent — re-running detects existing remediations and skips.

Audit mode

Goal: a truthful, actionable report — no changes to the app.

  1. For each R#, gather evidence: scan hits you verified by reading the code, plus stack facts (e.g. stack.db="neon-drizzle" + no EU region marker → R3; stack.agent="eve" → check R5/R4/R9/R10 in the agent).
  2. Write <root>/docs/compliance/audit-report.md: per finding → ID · severity (H/M/L) · article · evidence (file:line) · what's missing · recommended fix (safe-fix or decision). Group by severity. Lead with a one-paragraph posture summary and the "not legal advice" caveat.
  3. Update meta.json#compliance (see below) + append history ({ "skill": "compliance-audit", "action": "audit" }). No phase bump.

Remediate mode

Goal: apply the safe, mechanical mitigations; flag the decisions. Reuse existing skills — don't reinvent.

Auto-apply (safe / reversible):

  • R1 DSAR — scaffold an account data-export + erasure endpoint following the project's own server-action / auth pattern (web: lib/server/account.actions.ts + /settings/privacy route; mobile: a deleteAccount() in the auth lib; eve agent: export_memories + erase_all_memories tools per references/gdpr-ai-act-checklist.md). Wire the erasure cascade across the tenant's tables. Where module-add auth / rn-module-add / forms own the surface, invoke/extend them rather than hand-rolling.
  • R2 consent — a CookieConsentBanner + lib/consent.ts gate (blocks non-essential cookies/scripts until consent) + a /legal/privacy + /legal/cookies page stub. Mobile: log the push/ATT consent decision.
  • R5 AI-disclosure — a first-turn/persistent "you're interacting with an AI" disclosure (eve: into agent/instructions.md + the chat header; voice: a label on synthetic audio).
  • R4 retention/scrubbing — a lib/log.ts redaction helper (replace raw console.error(e) with a scrubbed logger) + a documented retention policy + a TTL/cleanup job stub tied to erasure; purge persisted caches on sign-out.
  • R8 sub-processors — generate docs/compliance/subprocessors.md from meta.json#stack (LLM provider, Vercel, Neon/Supabase/Firebase, Resend, Linear, RevenueCat, Expo push…), each with role + a DPA-link TODO.
  • R9/R10 guardrails — extend the eve memory guardrail (special-category + anti-manipulation) where an agent exists.

Flag only (needs a product/legal decision — never decide it): as TODO(compliance) entries in the report + inline:

  • R3 which EU region (Neon/Vercel/Supabase) and whether SCCs/adequacy apply.
  • R6 whether the use case is Annex III high-risk → if suspected, drop a DPIA template at docs/compliance/dpia-template.md, don't fill it in.
  • R9 the Art. 9 legal basis / explicit-consent flow; R2 the exact consent copy & lawful basis.

After remediating: rewrite audit-report.md with each finding marked fixed / flagged, list applied changes, update meta.json#compliance, append history. Every change is a reviewable diff.

meta.json#compliance block

"compliance": {
  "last_audit_at": "<ISO>",
  "findings": { "high": 0, "medium": 0, "low": 0 },
  "remediated": ["R1","R2","R5","R7","R8"],
  "flagged": ["R3","R6"],
  "data_residency": "eu" | "us" | null,
  "high_risk": true | false | null
}

dev-flow hook

Horizontal capability — invoke any time. dev-flow proposes it as a pre-deploy gate when a project reaches feature_complete (before shipping), and in the deployed maintenance loop (re-audit after changes). It records meta.json#compliance + history and never bumps phase (like the discipline skills and linear-scrum).

Definition of Done

  • Audit: docs/compliance/audit-report.md exists, every reported finding was verified in code (no raw scan noise), meta.json#compliance populated.
  • Remediate: safe fixes applied as reviewable diffs and marked fixed; decisions marked flagged with a DPIA template when high-risk is suspected; a re-run is a no-op for already-fixed items.
  • Script green: cd compliance-audit/scripts && python3 -m unittest test_scan.

What this skill does NOT do

  • Not legal advice / not a DPIA sign-off — it produces findings + a DPIA template; a DPO/lawyer confirms.
  • Doesn't decide region, legal basis, or high-risk classification — it flags them.
  • Doesn't build product features (use design-md-to-app / module-add / rn-*); it adds only the compliance controls.
  • Doesn't bump phase.

Reference files

  • references/gdpr-ai-act-checklist.md — the R1–R10 checklist, article mapping, and per-risk remediation recipes (safe-fix vs flag).
  • references/contracts.md — the .workflow/ dev-flow contract (vendored).

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.