Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mlunato47/claude-grc-pluginWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/commands/mlunato47/claude-grc-plugin/ssp-section)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/mlunato47/claude-grc-plugin/ssp-section"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mlunato47/claude-grc-plugin/ssp-section/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/mlunato47/claude-grc-plugin/ssp-section"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/mlunato47/claude-grc-plugin/ssp-section.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00005 | $0.01057 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00423 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00211 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00106 |
Grade A, and why
ssp-section scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 25d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- ssp-section — 100% identical, 2 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 111 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/grc:ssp-section
Draft SSP (System Security Plan) control family descriptions.
Usage
/grc:ssp-section [framework] [control-family]
Arguments
- framework: The compliance framework. Primarily
nist,fedramp, orfisma(SSP is an RMF artifact). Also supportscmmcfor NIST 800-171 security plans. - control-family: The control family ID or name (e.g.,
ac,access-control,ir,incident-response).
Examples
/grc:ssp-section fedramp ac
/grc:ssp-section nist ir
/grc:ssp-section fedramp ia
/grc:ssp-section cmmc access-control
/grc:ssp-section fedramp sc
Behavior
When invoked:
-
Identify the framework, baseline, and control family from arguments. Default to FedRAMP Moderate if no baseline specified.
-
Read the OSCAL family JSON for the complete control list and parameter definitions (use the Read tool — do NOT use Bash, Python, or jq to extract data):
- For
nist: readskills/grc-knowledge/oscal/nist-800-53-rev5/{family}.json - For
fedramp: readskills/grc-knowledge/oscal/fedramp-moderate-rev5/{family}.json - Extract all controls, enhancements, parameters (ODPs), and statement parts from the OSCAL data
- Use parameter values from the OSCAL data to populate FedRAMP-specific ODP values in narratives (these are legacy FedRAMP Rev5 values, in force until CR26 becomes mandatory Jan 1, 2027; CR26 removed most FedRAMP-assigned values — label them as such)
- Read
.parts[] | select(.name == "assessment-objective")to ensure the narrative addresses every testable objective — each leaf objective's.prosedescribes what an assessor will verify, so the narrative must cover it - ID normalization:
AC-2→ac-2,AC-2(1)→ac-2.1
- For
-
Read the framework reference file from
skills/grc-knowledge/frameworks/for additional narrative context, audit expectations, and cross-framework guidance. -
For each control in the family (at the appropriate baseline), draft SSP narrative language following the standard format:
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 25d ago Changed efb6e66e3777
- 1mo ago First seen · 111 lines · 5 tokens per session scan A 0ebe987bf137
ssp-section is a command published in the GitHub repository mlunato47/claude-grc-plugin (186 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 5 tokens to every session and 1,057 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
deps-audit
Audit project dependencies for vulnerabilities, outdated packages, license conflicts, and supply chain risks — then provide actionable remediation strategies.
review-epo-claims
Analyze patent claims for EPO Art. 84 EPC compliance - clarity, conciseness, support by description.
compliance-audit
Full regulatory compliance audit for GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, PCI-DSS, ISO 27001, and other frameworks with gap analysis, remediation planning, and evidence collection.
app-store-audit
Run an enterprise pre submission compliance audit on an iOS or Android app against Apple App Store and Google Play rejection rules. Pass a project path or run from the project root.
rgpd
Questões de RGPD e violação de dados — referência, playbook e checklist. GDPR and data-breach matters — reference, playbook and checklist.
arckit.fr-rgpd
You are helping an enterprise architect generate a French CNIL Compliance Assessment — the French-specific GDPR layer applied by the CNIL (Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés). Run this after /arckit:eu-rgpd to add French obligations that go beyond the EU GDPR baseline.