questionnaire-response

name

questionnaire-response

description

Fresh-session security questionnaire response for {{projectName}}. Parses a new inbound questionnaire from {{questionnaire_label}} in Gmail, matches each question to our vetted knowledge base of approved answers and policies, drafts responses in the vendor's own format (SIG, CAIQ, or a custom spreadsheet), flags anything it can't answer confidently, and posts the completed draft to {{security_channel}} — holding it for security to review before it goes back to the prospect.

Give a new inbound security questionnaire its full draft the moment it lands: parse every question out of whatever format it arrived in, match each one against our vetted knowledge base of approved answers and policies, draft the response back into the vendor's own layout, and flag anything without a confident match. Each questionnaire runs in its own fresh session — one questionnaire, one sandbox, nothing carried over — so this skill finds its own state from the Gmail thread rather than a ledger.

Reactive and knowledge-base-grounded; the agent drafts and flags, it never decides what goes back to the prospect.

- The polling cron fires and finds a questionnaire in {{questionnaire_label}} that hasn't been drafted yet. - A human asks for a first-pass draft of a specific questionnaire. - Someone asks what our vetted answer is for a specific question or topic.

Step 0 — Find what's new

# List messages in the questionnaire label/folder, newest first.
gmail.messages.list(label={{questionnaire_label}}, order="newest")

# Check each thread for an existing draft reply — a thread that already has
# one has already been worked.
gmail.drafts.list(thread=message.thread_id)

There is no ledger — this is a fresh session per questionnaire. The Gmail thread itself is the record of what's already been drafted. A thread with no draft is new; work the oldest unhandled one first.

Step 1 — Parse the questionnaire into individual questions

• Pull the attachment from the thread (SIG workbook, CAIQ, or custom spreadsheet).
• Open it with google_sheets and read every tab — some vendor formats spread sections (encryption, access control, incident response, …) across separate sheets.
• Extract each row as a discrete question, keeping its section, row reference, and exact wording. Note the vendor format so the draft goes back in the same layout.

Step 2 — Match each question to the vetted knowledge base

Work question by question against our approved answers and policy docs, carried as skills and memory until the team updates them:

Question topic	Vetted source	Typical confidence
Encryption at rest / in transit	.kortix/memory/security-answers.md#encryption	High — exact match
SSO / access controls	.kortix/memory/security-answers.md#access-controls	High
Incident response	.kortix/memory/security-answers.md#incident-response	High
Data retention & deletion	.kortix/memory/security-answers.md#data-retention	High
Subprocessors / sub-processing	.kortix/memory/security-answers.md#subprocessors	Medium — verify the list is current
Compliance standards (SOC 2, ISO 27001, …)	.kortix/memory/security-answers.md#standards	High
Anything with no matching entry	—	Flag for a person

A "confident match" means the question maps clearly to one vetted entry. If a question is a close paraphrase of a vetted one, use the vetted answer as written; if it combines two topics, compose from the matching entries rather than inventing new language. If the knowledge base has no entry for a topic, that is a flag, not an opening to reason from first principles.

Step 3 — Draft the response in the vendor's own format

Write each matched answer into the corresponding cell/field of the SIG, CAIQ, or custom spreadsheet — same layout, same tab, same row it came in on. Use the vetted wording; adapt only for length or formatting the cell requires, never the substance. Work on a copy of the attachment, never the original file.

Step 4 — Flag low-confidence questions

For every question from Step 2 with no confident match, mark its row (a flag column, a comment, or the vendor's own "needs follow-up" field if it has one) and add it to a running list: row reference, the question text, and why it isn't answered from the vetted set.

Step 5 — Draft the reply, never send

Attach the filled spreadsheet to a Gmail draft reply on the original thread, addressed to the sender. Save it as a draft only — never call send. The subject and body should make clear a completed draft is attached and pending internal review.

Step 6 — Post to {{security_channel}} and stop

Post one message to {{security_channel}}: a link to the draft, the vendor format, and the flagged-question list (row reference + question, one line each). If nothing was flagged, say so explicitly rather than omitting the line. The run ends here — a person from security reviews the draft, answers the flagged questions, and sends it.

- **Drafts are never sent.** The filled questionnaire goes back as a Gmail draft on the original thread; the agent never calls send and never emails the prospect directly. - **Grounded answers only.** Every drafted response traces to an entry in the vetted knowledge base; if there's no entry, that's a flag, not an invented answer. - **One questionnaire, one session.** No cross-run ledger — re-derive state from Gmail each time, and never re-draft a thread that already has a draft reply. - **Original attachment is read-only.** Fill a copy of the spreadsheet; never overwrite, delete, or move the source file. - **Secrets scoped.** Gmail and Google Sheets access is brokered server-side; no credential is ever shown to the model or written to a log.