agentsclimarketplace

Compliance assessment

Skill The-AI-Directory-Company/agents-and-skills/skills/compliance-assessment

70+ AI agent templates and 55+ skill definitions for Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, and other AI coding tools. Community-maintained, MIT licensed. Follows the Agent Skills specification.

Install
npx -y skills add The-AI-Directory-Company/agents-and-skills --skill compliance-assessment

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

  • 2 stars2 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

Conduct regulatory compliance assessments — mapping controls to frameworks (SOC 2, GDPR, HIPAA, ISO 27001), identifying gaps, and producing remediation roadmaps with evidence requirements.

SKILL.md

6.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Compliance Assessment

Before you start

Gather the following from the user. If anything is missing, ask before proceeding:

  1. Which frameworks apply? — SOC 2, GDPR, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, or others
  2. What is the scope? — Which systems, services, data types, and teams are in scope
  3. What is the driver? — Customer requirement, regulatory obligation, funding milestone, or internal initiative
  4. What is the timeline? — Audit date, certification deadline, or customer commitment
  5. What exists today? — Current policies, controls, prior audit reports, known gaps
  6. Who are the stakeholders? — Engineering, legal, security, executive sponsor

Assessment template

1. Define Scope Boundary

Document exactly what is in and out of scope:

In Scope:
- Systems: [List every system, service, and data store]
- Data types: [PII, PHI, financial data, credentials, logs]
- Teams: [Engineering, DevOps, support, HR]
- Environments: [Production, staging, CI/CD pipelines]
- Third parties: [Cloud providers, SaaS tools, subprocessors]

Out of Scope:
- [System/area]: [Reason]

Rules: if a third-party processes in-scope data, they are in scope. If staging has production data copies, staging is in scope. CI/CD pipelines deploying to production are in scope.

2. Map Controls to Framework Requirements

For each framework, map existing controls to requirements per control area:

RequirementFramework RefCurrent ControlStatusGap
Unique user IDsSOC 2 CC6.1, ISO A.9.2.1SSO via OktaCompliantNone
MFA for privileged accessSOC 2 CC6.1, ISO A.9.4.2MFA for admin rolesCompliantNone
Access reviewsSOC 2 CC6.2, ISO A.9.2.5NoneGapQuarterly review needed

Cover at minimum: Access Control, Data Protection (encryption, key management, retention), Logging and Monitoring, Incident Response, Change Management, Business Continuity, Vendor Management, HR Security (training, onboarding/offboarding).

3. Evidence Inventory

For every "Compliant" or "Partial" control, document: the control name, evidence type (policy document, configuration screenshot, logs/reports, process records, or third-party certification), evidence location, last verified date, and refresh cadence.

If evidence does not exist for a control marked "Compliant," it is not compliant. Undocumented controls fail audits.

4. Gap Analysis

For each gap, document using this format:

Gap ID:         GAP-001
Control Area:   Access Control
Requirement:    Quarterly access reviews (SOC 2 CC6.2)
Current State:  No regular access reviews performed
Risk Level:     High
Remediation:    Implement quarterly review with automated user listing
Evidence Needed: Review records, revocation tickets
Estimated Effort: 2 weeks to implement, 4 hours/quarter ongoing

Risk levels: Critical (regulatory violation, active exposure), High (control missing entirely), Medium (partially implemented), Low (exists but evidence incomplete).

5. Remediation Roadmap

Prioritize gaps into phases. Each item must have a single owner, deadline, and evidence deliverable:

  • Phase 1 (0-30 days): Critical and High gaps
  • Phase 2 (30-90 days): Medium gaps
  • Phase 3 (90-180 days): Low gaps and documentation

6. Framework-Specific Considerations

SOC 2: Type II requires a period of observation (3-12 months). Controls implemented one week before the audit window provide insufficient evidence.

GDPR: Requires data processing records (Article 30), DPIAs for high-risk processing (Article 35), and documented lawful basis for each processing activity.

HIPAA: Requires formal risk analysis, Business Associate Agreements with all PHI vendors, and minimum necessary access. Breach notification within 60 days.

ISO 27001: Requires a formal ISMS with Statement of Applicability, risk treatment plan, and management review. Certification requires accredited external audit.

Quality checklist

Before delivering a compliance assessment, verify:

  • Scope boundary is documented with explicit in/out decisions
  • Every control area has been assessed against each applicable framework
  • Each compliant control has evidence with location and verification date
  • Gaps include risk level, remediation steps, and evidence requirements
  • Remediation roadmap is phased with owners, deadlines, and deliverables
  • Framework-specific requirements (observation periods, mandatory documents) are addressed
  • Third-party/vendor controls are assessed, not assumed compliant

Common mistakes

  • Treating compliance as point-in-time. Controls must remain effective after the audit. Build ongoing processes, not one-time fixes.
  • Assuming vendor compliance covers you. Your cloud provider's SOC 2 does not make you SOC 2 compliant. You own your configuration.
  • Documenting controls that do not exist. Auditors verify operation, not just policy documents. A policy without an implemented process is a finding.
  • Ignoring evidence requirements. A control without evidence is a gap. Every control must produce verifiable proof of operation.
  • Scoping too narrowly. Excluding systems that process in-scope data creates unassessed risk. Auditors will question exclusions.
  • No single owner for remediation. "The team will handle it" means no one will. Every gap needs one person accountable by a specific date.

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.