Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索敏感数据github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计异常

compliance-automation合规自动化

Agent Skill

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。

总安装

250

周安装

10

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

81
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

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

简介

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。

SKILL.md

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

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

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

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 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills