codexkit-compliance-gap-review

codexkit-compliance-gap-review is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from hoavdc/CodexKit. It costs 79 tokens per session (708 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A procedure for comparing policies, procedures, and evidence with a named compliance framework such as privacy, AML, or KYC requirements.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to create gap matrices, control checklists, evidence request lists, and 30-, 60-, or 90-day remediation plans.
Why use it?
It turns unclear compliance concerns into documented gaps, risk levels, evidence needs, and practical remediation priorities.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review
Any agent
npx skills add hoavdc/CodexKit --skill codexkit-compliance-gap-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hoavdc/CodexKit

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for codexkit-compliance-gap-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-compliance-gap-review)
Your own site
<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="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 79 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 708 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00079 $0.00708
Opus 5 $0.00039 $0.00354
Sonnet 5 $0.00016 $0.00142
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00071

Measured 4d ago against content hash c7d2058c1487, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 4d 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.

skills/codexkit-compliance-gap-review/SKILL.md · 86 lines

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

  1. Define the exact framework and scope before evaluating anything.
  2. Break the framework into control requirements or evidence expectations.
  3. Compare current evidence against each requirement.
  4. Rate each gap by severity, exposure, and remediation effort.
  5. Separate high-risk gaps from documentation-only gaps.
  6. Build a practical 30/60/90-day remediation sequence and evidence request list.
  7. 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

Read the full file on GitHub · 86 lines

Files

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.

Changes

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.

  1. 4d ago First seen · 86 lines · 79 tokens per session scan A c7d2058c1487

Subscribe to this mod's changes

codexkit-compliance-gap-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository hoavdc/CodexKit (21 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 79 tokens to every session and 708 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

architecting-security

安全架构与治理:威胁建模 (STRIDE/PASTA/LINDDUN)、零信任身份架构、IAM/SSO/MFA/PAM、合规框架 (SOC2/PCI/HIPAA/GDPR)、DLP、隐私工程、安全控制设计。Use when designing security architecture, threat modeling new systems, implementing zero-trust identity, designing IAM/SSO/PAM, building compliance evidence chains, or planning privacy-by-design.

telagod/code-abyss · 104 tokens

code-review

Provides verification checklists for code review including acceptance criteria validation, specification compliance checking, OWASP security patterns, and evidence-based assessment. Use when verifying task implementation quality.

zebbern/termstack · 36 tokens

bionic-safety-net

Unified survival infrastructure: health, finance, legal safety, circuit breakers, and structural protection against all ruin classes. The last line of defense.

winstonkoh87/Athena-Public · 34 tokens

research-grants

Write competitive research proposals for NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA, and Taiwan NSTC. Agency-specific formatting, review criteria, budget preparation, broader impacts, significance statements, innovation narratives, and compliance with submission requirements.

LeonChaoX/qinyan-academic-skills · 48 tokens

tdd-workflow

Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code - write the test first, watch it fail, write minimal code to pass; ensures tests actually verify behavior by requiring failure first. Enforces RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle with iron-law compliance.

huangwb8/skills · 59 tokens

defending-applications

Application security defense knowledge for builders. Covers Web/API/GraphQL hardening (XSS/SQLi/SSRF/IDOR/BOLA/Mass Assignment/deserialization/upload/path traversal), authentication/authorization (OAuth 2.0/OIDC/JWT/Session/Cookie/SAML/SSO), and LLM application security (prompt injection, jailbreak, RAG poisoning…

telagod/code-abyss · 152 tokens