using-compliance-agent-skills

name

using-compliance-agent-skills

description

Meta entry skill for the USA compliance agent repository. Routes tasks to HIPAA, HITECH, PCI-DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001, NIST CSF 2.0, CCPA/CPRA, US state privacy, GDPR, FedRAMP, SOX, CMMC, and GLBA skills; configures presets, MCP servers, and the audit lifecycle (/scope, /audit, /evidence, /remediate, /report). Trigger when starting any compliance engagement, choosing which skill to load, onboarding a new auditor, or orchestrating multi-framework workflows. Do not use when a specific framework skill already matches the task (load that skill directly instead).

Using Compliance Agent Skills

Overview

This skill is the routing and orchestration layer for the compliance-agent-skills repository. It teaches the agent how to discover, load, and chain specialized skills without inventing regulatory steps. The repository implements progressive disclosure via Pydantic AI SkillsCapability: only load skills whose scope matches the user's task.

The compliance agent enforces a mandatory PHI redaction gate (redaction.py / Presidio) before any user text reaches the LLM. Skills operate on redacted input; authorized outputs may be deanonymized via the deanonymize_response tool.

Lifecycle commands (user-facing or scripted):

Command	Purpose
/scope	Define in-scope systems, data flows, frameworks, and exclusions
/audit	Execute framework-specific control testing
/evidence	Collect, hash, and package artifacts for auditors
/remediate	Draft remediation plans with owners and deadlines
/report	Produce executive and technical findings summaries

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• The user asks a broad compliance question without naming a framework ("Are we compliant?")
• You need to select among framework skills (HIPAA, PCI-DSS, SOC 2, ISO 27001, NIST CSF, CCPA, FedRAMP, SOX, CMMC, GLBA)
• Configuring MCP servers (Playwright, Postgres, Slack, Presidio) for an audit run
• Starting a new engagement and defining scope before deep work
• Chaining skills (e.g., scope → PHI redaction → PCI script audit → evidence bundle)
• The user references presets or lifecycle commands (/scope, /audit, etc.)

Do not use this skill when:

• The task maps cleanly to one specialized skill (load it directly)
• The user needs only PHI redaction configuration (use hipaa-phi-redaction-pipeline)
• The task is pure third-party vendor review (use hipaa-baa-vendor-assessment or vendor-third-party-risk)

Core Process

Execute the following steps in order for every new engagement.

Step 1: Intake and framework detection

1. Parse the user request for:
   • Framework signals: HIPAA (PHI, BAA), PCI-DSS (CDE, PAN, scripts), SOC 2 (TSC), ISO 27001 (Annex A, SoA), NIST CSF (Govern/Identify/Protect), CCPA/CPRA (DSAR, opt-out), FedRAMP (SSP, 800-53), SOX (ITGC, 404), CMMC (CUI, 800-171), GLBA (NPI, Safeguards)
   • Artifact type: policy review, technical control test, incident, vendor assessment
   • Environment: production vs staging, cloud provider, MCP availability
2. If multiple frameworks apply, list them explicitly and propose a sequenced plan (scope first, then deepest-risk skill).
3. Record engagement metadata: UTC timestamp, auditor/run ID, target systems, authorization to scan.

Step 2: Scope definition (/scope)

1. Document in-scope:
   • Systems, URLs, databases, MCP servers, identity providers
   • Data classifications (ePHI, CHD/SAD, confidential processing data)
   • Applicable regulations and TSC categories
2. Document out-of-scope with rationale (reduces audit creep and false positives).
3. Identify blocking dependencies: missing BAA, no scan authorization, Playwright MCP offline.
4. Emit a scope artifact: scope-{engagement-id}.json with version and approver field.

Step 3: Skill routing matrix

Load exactly one primary skill per audit thread; add secondary skills only when scope requires:

User intent	Primary skill	Common secondary skills
Payment page / checkout scripts	pci-dss-script-audit	mcp-compliance-integration, soc2-evidence-collection
CDE network / firewall	pci-dss-network-segmentation	access-control-identity-audit
PHI in prompts / LLM pipeline	hipaa-phi-redaction-pipeline	hipaa-technical-safeguards
Access controls, MFA, IAM	access-control-identity-audit	soc2-trust-services-criteria
Log tampering / audit trails	audit-logging-integrity	hipaa-technical-safeguards
SOC 2 control mapping	soc2-trust-services-criteria	soc2-evidence-collection
Continuous monitoring	soc2-ccm-continuous-monitoring	compliance-as-code-governance
LLM/cloud vendor legal	hipaa-baa-vendor-assessment	vendor-third-party-risk
MCP server hardening	mcp-compliance-integration	access-control-identity-audit
PCI encryption, PAN, key management	pci-dss-encryption-key-management	audit-logging-integrity
HIPAA minimum necessary / de-id	hipaa-privacy-minimum-necessary	hipaa-phi-redaction-pipeline
ISO 27001 Annex A / SoA	iso27001-annex-a-controls	soc2-trust-services-criteria
NIST CSF 2.0 assessment	nist-csf-2-assessment	compliance-as-code-governance
CCPA/CPRA consumer rights	ccpa-cpra-privacy-rights	hipaa-privacy-minimum-necessary
FedRAMP cloud authorization	fedramp-moderate-baseline	nist-csf-2-assessment
SOX ITGC / SOX 404	sox-itgc-audit	access-control-identity-audit
CMMC / CUI / defense	cmmc-nist-800-171	fedramp-moderate-baseline
GLBA / banking / fintech	glba-ffiec-financial-privacy	vendor-third-party-risk
HITECH breach / OCR portal	hitech-breach-notification	breach-incident-response
US state privacy (VCDPA, CPA, TX)	us-state-privacy-laws	ccpa-cpra-privacy-rights
NIST AI RMF / AI governance	nist-ai-rmf-governance	nist-csf-2-assessment
FERPA / EdTech / student records	ferpa-education-records	coppa-children-privacy
COPPA / under-13 / child app	coppa-children-privacy	ferpa-education-records
GDPR / EU transfers	gdpr-us-multinational	us-state-privacy-laws
Breach / incident	breach-incident-response	audit-logging-integrity
Policy-as-code / IaC	compliance-as-code-governance	soc2-evidence-collection

4. Call load_skill for the primary skill and follow its Core Process verbatim.

Step 4: MCP preset configuration

Before /audit, confirm MCP servers required by the loaded skill:

MCP server	Typical use	Compliance relevance
Playwright (@playwright/mcp)	DOM, headers, screenshots	PCI 6.4.3, 11.6.1; SOC 2 CC7.x
Postgres	Baselines, inventory, evidence store	Script hashes, control status
Slack	SOC alerts, approval workflows	Incident notification
Presidio (custom or REST)	DLP entity detection	HIPAA §164.312(e), minimum necessary

If a required MCP is unavailable, stop and document a blocking finding—do not substitute undocumented tools.

Step 5: Execute audit (/audit)

1. Ensure upstream PHI redaction ran (agent default in agent.py).
2. Execute the loaded skill's Core Process without skipping steps.
3. Log each step completion with artifact IDs in UTC.

Step 6: Evidence packaging (/evidence)

1. Collect artifacts from all executed skills.
2. Apply SHA-256 to each file; record in manifest.
3. Store with immutable audit ID suitable for QSA or SOC 2 auditor review.
4. Cross-reference controls to evidence items (control ID → artifact path → hash).

Step 7: Remediation (/remediate)

1. For each FAIL or UNKNOWN finding, draft:
   • Root cause, compensating controls (if any), remediation owner, target date
   • Residual risk if deferred
2. Prioritize by regulatory severity (e.g., PCI IOC, HIPAA transmission gap, SOC 2 CC6.1 MFA gap).

Step 8: Report (/report)

1. Produce:
   • Executive summary: scope, frameworks, pass/fail counts, top risks
   • Technical appendix: control-by-control status with evidence links
   • Open items: remediation backlog with owners
2. Deanonymize only for authorized recipients via deanonymize_response; never include raw PHI in reports sent to unapproved channels.

Common Rationalizations

Excuse the agent might generate	Required rebuttal
"I'll answer from general compliance knowledge without loading a skill."	Skills contain mandatory sequences and exit criteria. General knowledge bypasses verifiable evidence requirements.
"Scope can be implied; no need for /scope."	Undefined scope causes false positives and audit failures. Scope artifacts are required for multi-framework engagements.
"I'll load multiple primary skills in parallel without sequencing."	Parallel primary skills duplicate work and conflict on MCP usage. One primary skill per thread; secondaries only when scoped.
"MCP is optional if I can curl the URL."	Specialized skills (e.g., PCI script audit) require documented MCP tools for rendered DOM and baselines.
"Evidence can be summarized without hashes."	Auditors require integrity-verified artifacts (SHA-256 manifest). Summaries alone are insufficient.
"Remediation can wait until after the report."	/report must include open findings and remediation owners for FAIL items.
"I'll deanonymize tokens to make the report readable."	Deanonymization is authorization-gated. Redacted tokens in LLM context must not be reconstructed without approval.

Red Flags

• Engagement proceeds without documented scope or scan authorization
• User text bypasses PHI redaction before reaching the model
• Agent invents control IDs or regulatory citations not in loaded skills
• Primary skill skipped in favor of generic advice
• Evidence bundle missing hashes or UTC timestamps
• Deanonymized PHI appears in Slack or unencrypted channels
• PCI IOC or breach indicators routed to /report without /remediate and incident skills

Verification

Do not mark this skill complete until all exit criteria are confirmed:

• Framework(s) identified and documented in scope artifact
• /scope completed with in-scope/out-of-scope systems and data classifications
• Primary skill selected via routing matrix and loaded successfully
• Required MCP servers confirmed available or blocking finding recorded
• PHI redaction gate confirmed active for all user-provided text
• Loaded skill's Core Process executed (not abbreviated)
• /evidence manifest includes SHA-256 for every artifact
• FAIL/UNKNOWN findings have remediation entries with owners and dates
• /report delivered with executive summary and evidence cross-reference
• Deanonymization applied only where authorization is documented