Now liveThe Skillselion MCP - thousands of ranked skills, loaded into your agent mid-task. No install.Get it →
onewave-ai avatar

Compliance Checker

  • 162 installs
  • 237 repo stars
  • Updated July 15, 2026
  • onewave-ai/claude-skills

Audit sites and apps for GDPR, privacy, cookies, accessibility, and sector rules before launch to catch regulatory gaps early.

About

Compliance-checker automates regulatory and policy audits for web products, flagging GDPR, accessibility, consent, and sector-specific violations so teams remediate issues before ship instead of after user complaints.

  • Regulatory gap scans
  • Privacy policy checks
  • Cookie and consent review
  • Pre-launch audit checklist

Compliance Checker by the numbers

  • 162 all-time installs (skills.sh)
  • +4 installs in the week ending Aug 4, 2026 (Skillselion tracking)
  • Ranked #863 of 2,203 Security skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
  • Data as of Aug 5, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/onewave-ai/claude-skills --skill compliance-checker

Add your badge

Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.

Listed on Skillselion
Installs162
repo stars237
Last updatedJuly 15, 2026
Repositoryonewave-ai/claude-skills

What it does

Audit sites and apps for GDPR, privacy, cookies, accessibility, and sector rules before launch to catch regulatory gaps early.

Files

SKILL.mdMarkdownGitHub ↗

Compliance Checker

Perform thorough regulatory compliance audits against one or more frameworks, identify gaps, and produce actionable remediation guidance with evidence requirements suitable for certification preparation.

Contents

  • references/frameworks.md — the five supported frameworks (GDPR, HIPAA, SOC 2, CCPA, PCI-DSS): scope, key articles/requirements, penalties, and reference links.
  • references/scan-patterns.md — the seven scan categories, their search patterns, scan execution rules, and common pitfalls to always check.
  • references/classification.md — compliance status values, risk severity rubric, and the remediation detail fields.
  • references/cross-framework-mapping.md — control-area-to-framework mapping and the glossary.
  • references/output-template.md — the full compliance-report.md structure, including per-framework gap-analysis tables and evidence packs.

Workflow

Run the full methodology for every audit. Do not skip steps.

Phase 1: Discovery and Scoping

1. Identify the target: codebase, infrastructure configuration, business process documentation, or a combination. 2. Determine applicable frameworks from the data types processed, geographic scope, industry, and business model. See references/frameworks.md. When none are specified, assess all five and note applicability. 3. Map the data flow: where regulated data enters, how it is processed, where it is stored, and how it exits. 4. Inventory data categories present (PII, PHI, CHD, sensitive PI, special category data).

Phase 2: Scanning and Evidence Collection

5. Scan each of the seven categories — PII/sensitive data, data retention, encryption, access controls, audit logging, consent management, and data transfer. Apply the search patterns and execution rules in references/scan-patterns.md. Record exact file paths, line numbers, and snippets for both positive findings and gaps.

Phase 3: Gap Analysis

6. Map each finding to specific framework requirements, assign a compliance status, and assign a risk severity to every non-compliant or partial finding. Use the rubric in references/classification.md.

Phase 4: Remediation Planning

7. For each non-compliant or partial finding, produce the remediation detail (description, regulatory reference, current state, required state, steps, evidence, effort, dependencies) per references/classification.md. Cross-reference references/cross-framework-mapping.md to flag when one action closes gaps across multiple frameworks.

Phase 5: Report Generation

8. Generate compliance-report.md in the project root (or a user-specified location), following the mandatory structure in references/output-template.md. Every section is required; if a section has no findings, state that explicitly.

Behavioral Rules

1. Never fabricate findings. Back every finding with scan evidence. When evidence is absent, mark UNABLE TO ASSESS rather than guess. 2. Be specific. Reference exact file paths, line numbers, function names, and configuration keys. 3. Distinguish technical from organizational controls. Note when a finding requires verifying organizational controls (training, policies, physical security) that code review alone cannot confirm. 4. Consider the full stack: application code, database schemas, infrastructure configuration, CI/CD pipelines, dependency manifests, documentation, and environment configuration. 5. Prioritize actionable findings. Specify exact changes; avoid vague recommendations like "improve security". 6. Respect the scope. Audit only what is provided. Do not assume broader infrastructure without evidence. 7. Account for frameworks and libraries that handle compliance concerns (ORM parameterized queries, framework CSRF protection); credit them as positive findings but verify configuration. 8. Avoid false positives. Missing a marginal finding is better than reporting a non-gap. Err toward accuracy. 9. Cross-reference across frameworks. Note when a single remediation addresses multiple regulations. 10. Date and version everything so the report can be compared against future audits.

Responding to Requests

  • "Audit this codebase" / "check compliance": Confirm which frameworks to focus on (or assess all five), run Phases 1-5, generate compliance-report.md, and summarize the most critical findings.
  • "Check for [framework]": Focus on that framework, still scan all seven categories, and map findings only to it.
  • "Check [category]" (e.g., "check encryption"): Focus the scan on that category and map findings to all applicable frameworks.
  • "Are we [requirement] compliant?" (e.g., GDPR Art. 17): Focus on the relevant controls, give a direct assessment with evidence, and offer remediation if gaps exist.
  • Business process documentation instead of code: Adapt the methodology to document analysis, focus on policy and procedure requirements, and note that technical controls cannot be verified without codebase access.

Related skills

Securitycomplianceaudit

This week in AI coding

Five minutes, every Monday - the tools, releases and tactics for developers.

unsubscribe anytime.