Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

compliance-automation(合规自动化)

compliance-automation 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

compliance-automation 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,674 个 Skill 里排第 67,168。

总安装 250周安装 10GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 81核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:compliance-automation(合规自动化)
来源仓库:https://github.com/screenata/compliance-automation
仓库路径:skills/compliance-automation
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/screenata/compliance-automation --skill compliance-automation
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/screenata/compliance-automation --skill compliance-automation

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

compliance-automation 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据关键词快速定位候选结果。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装并使用。建议确认权限范围和维护状态,避免触发不必要的联网或文件操作。

具体用法请参考原始 README 和项目文档。

来源仓库内路径:skills/compliance-automation

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/screenata/compliance-automation --skill compli…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要接触敏感数据,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

compliance-automation 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/screenata/compliance-automation --skill compliance-autom…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

compliance-automation 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

compliance-automation 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

compliance-automation 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

compliance-automation 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 250 次,近一周安装 10 次,下载 81 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

compliance-automation 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
compliance-automation

合规自动化 · 本页

250—接触敏感数据未明确未通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Compliance Automation

Generate compliance policies, automate evidence collection, assess audit readiness, and respond to auditor control matrices — all from one skill.

Important Disclaimer

GENERATED DRAFTS ONLY - All policies and responses require human review before use. These are starting points, not audit-ready documents.

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when the user:

  • Needs to create compliance policies (SOC 2, ISO 27001, or both)
  • Mentions SOC 2 certification, ISO 27001 certification, or audit preparation
  • Asks for security policy templates or compliance documentation
  • Wants to set up automated evidence collection or GitHub Actions workflows
  • Pastes an auditor's control matrix or security questionnaire
  • Asks to respond to a vendor security questionnaire (SIG, CAIQ, or custom)
  • Wants to assess audit readiness, run a gap analysis, or understand compliance posture
  • Is new to SOC 2 and wants to understand the basics before starting

Routing

Detect what the user needs and load the appropriate workflow:

Route A: External Document Response

Check FIRST — before starting the normal policy workflow, check if the user is providing an external compliance document. Route here if ANY of these signals are present:

  • Keywords: "control matrix", "test plan", "security questionnaire", "SIG", "CAIQ", "vendor questionnaire", "RFP", "auditor requirements", "respond to this", "map this to our compliance"
  • Structural signals: tabular or list format with 10+ items, numbered test IDs (e.g., "1.1", "TST-003"), control codes (e.g., "CC6.1", "A.5.15"), compliance-oriented descriptions
  • Explicit request: "here's what our auditor needs", "can you generate responses to this"

If detected → Load references/workflow-responses.md and follow its steps.

Route B: Evidence Collection

Route here if the user specifically asks about evidence collection without needing policies first:

  • Keywords: "set up evidence collection", "automate compliance monitoring", "GitHub Actions for compliance", "evidence scripts", "configure SaaS tools for compliance"

If detected → Load references/workflow-evidence.md and follow its steps.

Route D: Audit Readiness Assessment

Route here if the user wants to understand their current compliance posture before generating policies:

  • Keywords: "how ready are we", "readiness assessment", "gap analysis", "compliance gaps", "assess our compliance", "compliance posture", "what's missing", "pre-audit check", "compliance scan", "where do we stand", "security assessment", "audit readiness"
  • Structural signals: User asks an evaluative question about their current state rather than requesting a specific artifact (policy, script, response)
  • Explicit request: "scan my codebase for compliance", "show me our gaps", "run an assessment"

If detected → Load references/workflow-assessment.md and follow its steps.

Route E: Orientation & Getting Started

Route here if the user is new to compliance or asking foundational questions:

  • Keywords: "what is SOC 2", "where do I start", "new to compliance", "SOC 2 101", "explain SOC 2", "how does SOC 2 work", "getting started", "first time", "help me understand", "what do I need for SOC 2"
  • Structural signals: User asks broad/foundational questions rather than requesting a specific artifact (policy, script, response) or action
  • Explicit request: "walk me through SOC 2", "I don't know where to begin"

If detected → Load references/workflow-orientation.md and follow its steps.

Route F: Evidence Inventory

Route here if the user wants to see what evidence has been collected or build an inventory from scan results:

  • Keywords: "inventory", "what did we find", "evidence summary", "aggregate evidence", "show collected evidence", "list all evidence", "what do we have", "evidence index", "asset inventory", "identity inventory"
  • Structural signals: User asks about collected scan results rather than requesting new scanning or policies
  • Prerequisite: .compliance/evidence/ must contain at least one .json file

If detected → Load references/workflow-inventory.md and follow its steps.

Route C: Policy Generation (default)

If none of Routes A, B, D, E, or F match, this is the default. The user wants to generate policies:

  • Keywords: "generate policies", "SOC 2", "ISO 27001", "compliance policies", "security policies", "audit preparation"

First-time user nudge: If Route C triggers AND .compliance/config.json does not exist, present this choice before starting the policy workflow:

Before generating policies, I'd recommend starting with a readiness assessment to understand where you stand. This takes about 5 minutes and scans your codebase for existing controls. Would you like to: 1. Run a readiness assessment first (recommended) 2. Jump straight to policy generation 3. Get a quick orientation on how SOC 2 works

If .compliance/config.json already exists, skip the nudge and load references/workflow-policies.md directly.

After policies are generated, the user may continue to evidence collection (Route B) or receive an external document (Route A). The workflows interconnect through the .compliance/ directory.

Session State

CRITICAL: All session state MUST be written to the .compliance/ folder. Do NOT rely on in-memory context, agent-internal files, or conversation history.

CRITICAL: This is a conversational flow. Ask ONE question, wait for answer, then ask the next. NEVER list multiple questions in a single message.

.compliance/
├── config.json               # Company context — created during onboarding, read by all workflows
├── status.md                 # Progress tracking — updated by all workflows
├── assessment.md             # Readiness assessment report (generated by assessment workflow)
├── secrets.env               # API tokens (must be in .gitignore)
├── tasks/                    # Filesystem task queue for tracking work items
│   └── {task-id}.md          # See references/task-system.md
├── answers/{policy-id}.md    # Per-policy Q&A answers (editable before generation)
├── policies/{policy-id}.md   # Generated policy documents
├── scripts/                  # Evidence collection scripts + configs
├── evidence/                 # Collected evidence
│   ├── code/                 # Codebase scan results
│   ├── cloud/                # Cloud infrastructure results
│   ├── saas/                 # SaaS tool results
│   └── manual/{policy-id}/   # User-collected evidence
├── inventories/              # Aggregated inventories (generated by inventory workflow)
│   ├── identities.md          # Users, service accounts, roles
│   ├── assets.md              # Compute, deployments, DNS
│   ├── data-stores.md         # Databases, storage, key vaults
│   ├── network.md             # Firewalls, WAF, SSL policies
│   ├── integrations.md        # SaaS tools, monitoring, alerting
│   ├── summary.md             # Executive summary with counts
│   └── inventory.json         # Machine-readable combined inventory
└── responses/                # Auditor response mappings
    ├── {name}-raw.md          # Parsed input document
    ├── {name}.md              # Draft response document
    └── {name}-filled.xlsx     # Filled spreadsheet

Output Format

File Header

Every policy file MUST start with:

<!--
GENERATED DRAFT ONLY - USER REVIEW REQUIRED

- Not audit-ready
- Not legally binding
- Not a substitute for professional audits

Review, edit, and own all content.
-->

File Footer

Every policy MUST end with:

---
**Policy Safety Note:** This draft deliberately under-claims to reduce risk.
Auditors may require stronger language + evidence of operation.

---
Generated with [Compliance Automation](https://github.com/screenata/compliance-automation)

Evidence Types

TypeDescriptionExample
ScreenshotSingle UI screenshot captureMFA settings page, access review dashboard
WorkflowMulti-step recorded processAccess provisioning flow, incident response drill
PolicyPDF/document uploadSigned code of conduct, org chart, board minutes
LogSystem-generated recordsAccess review exports, audit logs, change records

Format evidence requirements as a table with a Status checkbox column. Include sufficiency criteria in the Description:

## Proof Required Later

| Status | Evidence | Type | Description |
|--------|----------|------|-------------|
| [ ] | MFA enforcement settings | Screenshot | IdP admin console showing MFA required. Must show: policy enabled, scope = all users, no exceptions |
| [ ] | Access provisioning ticket | Workflow | Recording of approval flow. Must show: request, manager approval, IT provisioning, access granted |

Reference Index

Workflow Details

WorkflowFileWhen to Load
Policy Generationworkflow-policies.mdUser wants to generate policies (Steps 1-6)
Evidence Collectionworkflow-evidence.mdUser wants evidence scripts + GitHub Actions
Document Responseworkflow-responses.mdUser provides a control matrix or questionnaire
Audit Readiness Assessmentworkflow-assessment.mdUser wants to assess compliance posture or run a gap analysis
Orientationworkflow-orientation.mdUser is new to SOC 2 and needs foundational understanding
Evidence Inventoryworkflow-inventory.mdUser wants to aggregate evidence into structured inventories

Codebase Scanning

PolicyScanning FileSOC 2 TSCISO 27001 Annex A
Access Controlaccess-control.mdCC6.1-6.3A.5.15-5.18, A.8.2-8.3, A.8.5
Data Managementdata-management.mdCC6.5-6.7A.5.9-5.13, A.8.10-8.12
Network Securitynetwork-security.mdCC6.6-6.7, CC7.1A.8.20-8.22, A.8.24
Change Managementchange-management.mdCC8.1A.8.9, A.8.25, A.8.32
Vulnerability & Monitoringvulnerability-monitoring.mdCC7.1-7.2A.5.7, A.8.8, A.8.16

Shared guidelines: shared.md. SaaS detection: saas-detection.md.

Cloud Scanning

ProviderScanning FileCovers
AWSaws.mdIAM, S3, RDS, KMS, ELB, EC2, WAF, ECR, SecurityHub, GuardDuty, CloudTrail, Backup
GCPgcp.mdIAM, Cloud SQL, KMS, SSL Policies, Firewall, Cloud Armor, SCC
Azureazure.mdAzure AD, RBAC, Storage, SQL, NSG, App Gateway, Defender

Shared cloud guidelines: cloud-shared.md

SaaS Integrations

CategoryFileTools
Identity & Accessidentity.mdOkta, Auth0, Google Workspace, JumpCloud
Monitoring & Alertingmonitoring.mdDatadog, PagerDuty, New Relic, Splunk
Project & Change Mgmtproject-management.mdJira, Linear, GitHub
Communicationscommunications.mdSlack, Opsgenie, Statuspage
HR & Peoplehr.mdBambooHR, Gusto, Rippling
Endpoint Managementendpoint.mdJamf, Kandji, Intune
Security Scanningsecurity.mdSnyk, SonarCloud

Shared SaaS guidelines: shared.md

Other References

Important Notes

  • NEVER batch questions — ask ONE question per message, wait for answer
  • Generate ONE policy at a time
  • Use the user's actual answers to customize procedures
  • Tailor complexity to company size (smaller = simpler controls)
  • For healthcare/fintech, include relevant compliance alignment notes
  • Always include placeholders like [timeframe], [owner name] for values the user should fill in
  • When scanning is enabled, extract concrete values and use them instead of placeholders. Reference with file:line
  • When a concrete value is found, bold it in both the evidence table and the policy text
  • Cloud scanning safety: Only run read-only CLI commands (describe, list, get, show). NEVER run commands that modify infrastructure. Never include secrets, private keys, or credential values in evidence output
  • SaaS scanning safety: Only call read-only API endpoints (GET requests). Never call endpoints that create, update, or delete data. Redact PII — use counts and percentages instead of user lists. Never include API tokens in evidence output
  • When evidence exists from multiple sources (code, cloud, SaaS), compare overlapping controls and flag drift/discrepancies with a cross-source comparison table

平台分布

Codex

36.92%
按下载量换算30

Claude

30.92%
按下载量换算25

Cursor

18.37%
按下载量换算15

Gemini CLI

8.88%
按下载量换算7

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

可疑

Socket

通过

Snyk

未通过

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills