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.
npx skills add hoavdc/CodexKit --skill codexkit-compliance-gap-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hoavdc/CodexKitWrote 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/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review/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/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review.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 | $0.00079 | $0.00708 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00032 | $0.00283 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00142 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
codexkit-compliance-gap-review 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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Compliance Gap Review
Purpose
Transform a vague compliance concern into a concrete gap assessment and remediation view.
When to use
- A team needs to assess readiness against AML, KYC, privacy, audit, or control expectations.
- Policies and evidence exist but no one has mapped gaps clearly.
- Leadership needs remediation priorities, not just a checklist dump.
When not to use
- No target framework, policy baseline, or standard is named.
- The request requires a formal legal opinion or regulator submission.
Inputs
- named framework, regulation, or internal control standard
- current policies, procedures, forms, or evidence
- scope: business unit, process, customer segment, or geography
- known incidents, findings, or deadlines
Procedure
- Define the exact framework and scope before evaluating anything.
- Break the framework into control requirements or evidence expectations.
- Compare current evidence against each requirement.
- Rate each gap by severity, exposure, and remediation effort.
- Separate high-risk gaps from documentation-only gaps.
- Build a practical 30/60/90-day remediation sequence and evidence request list.
- Escalate areas that need specialist legal or regulatory review.
Output
- control or requirement matrix
- current-state evidence summary
- gap list with severity and rationale
- remediation plan with owners and priorities
- evidence request list for unresolved areas
Definition of done
- The target framework is explicit.
- Gaps are mapped to concrete requirements, not vague opinions.
- The output shows what to fix first and what evidence is still missing.
Examples
- "Compare our onboarding process to AML and KYC expectations and tell me the top gaps."
- "Assess our privacy operating procedures against our internal control checklist."
Quality Criteria
- Every finding is tied to a specific evidence source (log, test, metric)
- Pass/fail criteria are binary and measurable — no subjective judgments
- Severity levels are assigned with clear thresholds
- Remediation steps are provided for all critical and high findings
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 86 lines · 79 tokens per session scan A c7d2058c1487
codexkit-compliance-gap-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository hoavdc/CodexKit (26 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 79 tokens to every session and 708 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
architecting-security
A security-architecture guide for modeling threats and designing identity, access, privacy, and compliance controls. It covers approaches such as STRIDE, zero trust, single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, and GDPR-related privacy work.
bionic-safety-net
Unified survival infrastructure: health, finance, legal safety, circuit breakers, and structural protection against all ruin classes. The last line of defense.
security-compliance
Guides security professionals in implementing defense-in-depth security architectures, achieving compliance with industry frameworks (SOC2, ISO27001, GDPR, HIPAA), conducting threat modeling and risk assessments, managing security operations and incident response, and embedding security throughout the SDLC.
promo-video-pipeline
A workflow for producing promotional videos with Remotion, a React-based tool that renders video from code. It splits a storyboard into scenes, assigns work to separate agents, combines the results, and checks the actual rendered video.
verification-loop
Evidence-before-assertions workflow. Use before claiming work is done, before release, and after any behavior change in scripts/skills/MCP.
debug-hub
Evidence-first debugging WITH MCP tools. Use when debughub MCP server is available. Inject log calls, collect via HTTP API (port 39200), analyze through MCP tools, clean up when done. If debughub MCP is unavailable, use debug skill (bundled Python collector) instead.