Claude Skill

regulatory-compliance

Identifies which regulations apply and builds the program that keeps you inside them — obligation mapping, controls, monitoring, and responding to regulators. Use this to work out what applies to your business, stand up a compliance program, prepare for a regulatory exam or certi

LLM Mart · 0 points · 13 views 0 listing impressions 0 install-command copies
Virus-scanned Reviewed automatically before listing.

Full trust report

Download cbrock84-headcount-plugins_legal-risk_skills_regulatory-compliance-98d1c17.zip · 3 KB
Part of cbrock84/headcount — 160 skills

Install

skills CLI npx skills add https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/legal-risk/skills/regulatory-compliance
Claude Code claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install cbrock84-headcount@llmmart
Git git clone https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git

The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole cbrock84/headcount collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.

Skill manifest

Regulatory compliance

Compliance failures are rarely defiance. They are almost always an obligation nobody knew applied, in a jurisdiction nobody was watching, discovered by someone external.

This structures the work and names what to ask. Which regulations apply, and what they require, are legal determinations that vary by jurisdiction and change — they belong with qualified counsel. Nothing here substitutes for that.

Start with an obligation map, not a framework

The first question is not "are we SOC 2 compliant" but "what are we actually obliged to do, by whom, and what happens if we do not." Build the map from facts about the business:

  • What you sell, and to whom. Selling to regulated customers pulls their obligations onto you through contract even when the regulation does not reach you directly.
  • What data you hold. Personal data, health data, payment data and children's data each carry distinct regimes — see legal-risk:privacy-and-data-protection.
  • Where you operate and where your customers are. Obligations follow the customer more often than companies expect.
  • How you are funded and structured. Public, regulated, or government-adjacent adds regimes.

Distinguish three things that get conflated: law you must follow, certifications you choose to obtain commercially, and contractual commitments you signed. Only the first carries state enforcement; all three carry consequences.

Certifications are evidence, not compliance

SOC 2, ISO 27001 and their equivalents demonstrate that controls exist and operate. They do not establish that you meet any legal obligation, and a clean report is not a defense to a regulator.

Where they earn their cost is commercially — an enterprise prospect makes the certification a condition of the deal, and the certification is what unblocks it. Scope them to what the market asks for rather than to everything, since scope drives cost more than any other decision.

The program is monitoring, not documentation

A compliance program that produces policies and stops is a shelf. What makes it real:

  • An owner per obligation — a named person, not a department.
  • Controls that produce evidence as a by-product of the work, rather than evidence assembled before an audit. See finance:internal-controls-and-audit for the control design pattern.
  • Monitoring that would detect failure before an external party does, with the frequency matched to how fast the obligation can be breached.
  • Horizon scanning. Regulation changes; a map built once is wrong within a year.

When a regulator arrives

Respond promptly, accurately, and narrowly — answer what was asked. Route everything through counsel before it goes out, preserve records from the moment you are aware, and never let an informal conversation become an undocumented commitment.

Findings get root-caused like any other failure. A remediation that consists of retraining people on a process that made the failure easy will produce the same finding next cycle.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Tooling

Compliance automation — Vanta, Drata, Secureframe, Keel GRC, and similar — collects evidence continuously and maps one control across several frameworks. It earns its cost on the second audit far more often than the first.

Policy and attestation lives in those same tools, or in the HRIS, or in Confluence. What matters is that a policy carries a version, an owner, and a record of who acknowledged it.

Never

  • Treat a certification as evidence of legal compliance.
  • Build a compliance program without a named owner per obligation.
  • Assemble control evidence retrospectively for an audit.
  • Answer a regulator without counsel reviewing the response.
Files (headcount)
  • references
    • sources.md 4.1 KB
      # Sources — `legal-risk:regulatory-compliance`
      
      <!-- Generated by scripts/build-sources.py from sources/*.toml. Do not edit. -->
      
      Check these before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. The use note on each one is binding: most of what a professional cites is free to read and not free to reproduce.
      
      ## Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
      
      US Government Publishing Office / NARA · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.ecfr.gov/>
      
      Machine-readable: <https://www.ecfr.gov/developers/documentation/api/v1>
      
      **Authoritative for:** The current text of US federal regulation, updated daily. This is the citation of record — an agency web page summarizing its own rule is not.
      
      ## FedRAMP baselines and automation content
      
      GSA · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.fedramp.gov/rev5/documents-templates/>
      
      Machine-readable: <https://github.com/GSA/fedramp-automation>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Which SP 800-53 controls apply at low, moderate and high impact for a cloud service selling to the US federal government, and the evidence each requires.
      
      ## ISO/IEC 27001 — Information security management systems
      
      ISO · global · **sold — cite the identifier only, never the text**
      
      <https://www.iso.org/standard/27001>
      
      **Authoritative for:** The certifiable ISMS standard enterprise buyers ask for by name. The text is sold, not published — cite the clause number, never the wording.
      
      ## Legal Information Institute
      
      Cornell Law School · US · **read and cite only — copyrighted, do not reproduce**
      
      <https://www.law.cornell.edu/>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Finding the right provision fast, with plain-language context around it. The underlying law is public domain; LII's annotations and commentary are not — follow through to the primary source before citing.
      
      ## OSHA law and regulations
      
      US Occupational Safety and Health Administration · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Workplace safety obligation, recordkeeping requirements and the reporting windows for a fatality or serious injury.
      
      ## Regulation (EU) 2016/679 — GDPR
      
      Publications Office of the European Union · EU · free to use with attribution — credit the publisher
      
      <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj>
      
      **Authoritative for:** The operative text of the GDPR. EU legal texts are reusable with attribution under the Commission's reuse decision, so this is quotable where a national summary is not.
      
      ## Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — the AI Act
      
      Publications Office of the European Union · EU · free to use with attribution — credit the publisher
      
      <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Whether an AI system is prohibited, high-risk or limited-risk in the EU and what obligations attach. Binding law rather than guidance, and only the Official Journal version is authentic.
      
      ## SANS Information Security Policy Templates
      
      SANS Institute · global · **read and cite only — copyrighted, do not reproduce**
      
      <https://www.sans.org/information-security-policy/>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Starting-point policy language for the policies an auditor expects to exist. Read and adapt; the templates are copyrighted and are not open-licensed.
      
      ## United States Code
      
      Office of the Law Revision Counsel, US House of Representatives · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://uscode.house.gov/>
      
      **Authoritative for:** The consolidated text of US federal statute, where a regulation's authority is traced back to the law that permits it.
      
      ## govinfo
      
      US Government Publishing Office · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely
      
      <https://www.govinfo.gov/>
      
      Machine-readable: <https://api.govinfo.gov/docs/>
      
      **Authoritative for:** Authenticated federal documents — the Federal Register, bills, the Congressional Record — when the question is what was actually published and when.
      
      ---
      
      Sources are maintained in `sources/` upstream, not here. If one is wrong, out of date, or missing, fix it there — this file is regenerated and an edit to it is lost.
      
  • SKILL.md 4.4 KB
    ---
    name: regulatory-compliance
    description: Identifies which regulations apply and builds the program that keeps you inside them — obligation mapping, controls, monitoring, and responding to regulators. Use this to work out what applies to your business, stand up a compliance program, prepare for a regulatory exam or certification, respond to a finding, or assess exposure before entering a new market.
    ---
    
    # Regulatory compliance
    
    Compliance failures are rarely defiance. They are almost always an obligation nobody knew applied,
    in a jurisdiction nobody was watching, discovered by someone external.
    
    **This structures the work and names what to ask. Which regulations apply, and what they require,
    are legal determinations that vary by jurisdiction and change — they belong with qualified counsel.
    Nothing here substitutes for that.**
    
    ## Start with an obligation map, not a framework
    
    The first question is not "are we SOC 2 compliant" but "what are we actually obliged to do, by
    whom, and what happens if we do not." Build the map from facts about the business:
    
    - **What you sell, and to whom.** Selling to regulated customers pulls their obligations onto you
      through contract even when the regulation does not reach you directly.
    - **What data you hold.** Personal data, health data, payment data and children's data each carry
      distinct regimes — see `legal-risk:privacy-and-data-protection`.
    - **Where you operate and where your customers are.** Obligations follow the customer more often
      than companies expect.
    - **How you are funded and structured.** Public, regulated, or government-adjacent adds regimes.
    
    Distinguish three things that get conflated: **law** you must follow, **certifications** you choose
    to obtain commercially, and **contractual commitments** you signed. Only the first carries state
    enforcement; all three carry consequences.
    
    ## Certifications are evidence, not compliance
    
    SOC 2, ISO 27001 and their equivalents demonstrate that controls exist and operate. They do not
    establish that you meet any legal obligation, and a clean report is not a defense to a regulator.
    
    Where they earn their cost is commercially — an enterprise prospect makes the certification a
    condition of the deal, and the certification is what unblocks it. Scope them to what the market
    asks for rather than to everything, since scope drives cost more than any other decision.
    
    ## The program is monitoring, not documentation
    
    A compliance program that produces policies and stops is a shelf. What makes it real:
    
    - **An owner per obligation** — a named person, not a department.
    - **Controls that produce evidence as a by-product** of the work, rather than evidence assembled
      before an audit. See `finance:internal-controls-and-audit` for the control design pattern.
    - **Monitoring that would detect failure** before an external party does, with the frequency matched
      to how fast the obligation can be breached.
    - **Horizon scanning.** Regulation changes; a map built once is wrong within a year.
    
    ## When a regulator arrives
    
    Respond promptly, accurately, and narrowly — answer what was asked. Route everything through counsel
    before it goes out, preserve records from the moment you are aware, and never let an informal
    conversation become an undocumented commitment.
    
    Findings get root-caused like any other failure. A remediation that consists of retraining people on
    a process that made the failure easy will produce the same finding next cycle.
    
    ## Sources
    
    `references/sources.md` in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions
    here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before
    answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free
    to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.
    
    ## Tooling
    
    Compliance automation — Vanta, Drata, Secureframe, Keel GRC, and similar — collects
    evidence continuously and maps one control across several frameworks. It earns its cost on
    the second audit far more often than the first.
    
    Policy and attestation lives in those same tools, or in the HRIS, or in Confluence. What
    matters is that a policy carries a version, an owner, and a record of who acknowledged it.
    
    ## Never
    
    - Treat a certification as evidence of legal compliance.
    - Build a compliance program without a named owner per obligation.
    - Assemble control evidence retrospectively for an audit.
    - Answer a regulator without counsel reviewing the response.
    

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation.

No comments yet.

Reviews (0)

No reviews yet.

Related