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 oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring --skill compliance-cataloggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoringWrote 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/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/compliance-catalog)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/compliance-catalog"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/compliance-catalog/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/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/compliance-catalog"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring/compliance-catalog.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 | $0.00066 | $0.21200 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.10600 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.04240 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.02120 |
Grade A, and why
compliance-catalog 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 10d 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 — 1,142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Compliance Catalog
Convert a compliance document PDF into a validated OSCAL Catalog JSON through an iterative loop between a deterministic extraction script (generate.py) and a comprehensive validator (validate.py).
┌─ Catalog Agent (loop control, CONFIG edits, gap judgments) ────────────┐
│ ┌─ Deterministic Extraction Pipeline (scripts/) ────────────────────┐ │
│ │ PDF → text extract → structure parse → OSCAL emit │ │
│ │ → postprocess → validate (17 rules + trestle) │ │
│ └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
generate.py ──▶ catalog.json ──▶ validate.py
▲ │
└── FIX_GUIDANCE tells you which ─┘
function of generate.py to edit
What is an OSCAL Catalog, and what counts as a control
An OSCAL Catalog is NIST's machine-readable representation of a compliance document. OSCAL defines a control as "a requirement or guideline, which when implemented will reduce an aspect of risk related to an information system and its information" — not simply "a numbered thing in the document." A catalog groups controls under group (the document's own Parts / Chapters / Schedules), and each control's textual content lives in a part named statement.
This matters because compliance PDFs almost always contain numbered units that are not controls under this definition: definitions sections, purely administrative articles (commencement dates, amending formulas, short titles), and similar non-normative text. The final catalog.json you deliver must not contain these units — only genuine requirements. See "Extraction is requirement-agnostic; exclusion is a separate, reviewable step" below for the two-pass mechanism (excluded_units.json) that achieves this without weakening the extraction itself.
What Phase 2's FIRST generate.py run does, unaffected by the paragraph above: extract every numbered unit in the PDF as a control, exactly as this document already instructs — extraction stays mechanical and complete. The removal of non-requirement units happens in a later, separate step (Phase 2's second generate.py run, after excluded_units.json is written). The OSCAL definition above explains why the catalog is organized as controls-under-groups and why statement is the right place for extracted prose — it does not change what the first pass extracts.
What ships with it
20 files 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.
- apm.yml 1018 B
- LICENSE.txt 11 KB
- scripts/analyze_pdf.py 5.0 KB runs code
- scripts/build_author_prompt.py 51 KB runs code
- scripts/build_fix_prompt.py 36 KB runs code
- scripts/build_report_prompt.py 35 KB runs code
- scripts/build_validate_prompt.py 19 KB runs code
- scripts/detect_fix_loop_stall.py 5.1 KB runs code
- scripts/generate_lib.py 23 KB runs code
- scripts/generate_template.py 52 KB runs code
- scripts/postprocess_catalog.py 32 KB runs code
- scripts/requirements.txt 98 B
- scripts/seed_aware_fix.py 34 KB runs code
- scripts/seed_fill_titles.py 5.9 KB runs code
- scripts/seed_validate_baseline.py 6.7 KB runs code
- scripts/validate_config_template.py 6.6 KB runs code
- scripts/validate_oscal_catalog.py 3.3 KB runs code
- scripts/validate_template.py 85 KB runs code
- scripts/validate_validate_py.py 9.0 KB runs code
- scripts/wait_for.py 26 KB runs code
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 1,142 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A a19226313a5a
compliance-catalog is a skill published in the GitHub repository oscal-compass/agentic-agile-authoring (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 21,200 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
specification-writing
A workflow for writing complete patent specifications from patent claims and an invention disclosure. It adapts the document to a chosen jurisdiction, such as the US, Europe, or China.
regulatory-research-fallback
Fallback workflow for regulatory research when web extraction tools fail on government PDFs.
x-scorecard
OpenSSF Scorecard for assessing open source project security. Check security best practices and compliance. Dependency: This is an x-cmd module. Install x-cmd first (see x-cmd skill for installation options). see x-cmd skill for installation.
gesellschaftsrechtliche-satzungen-agb
Für Gesellschaftsrechtliche Satzungen AGB Abgrenzung: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: gesellschaftsrechtliche-satzungen-agb.
memstack-business-gdpr
Use this skill when the user says 'GDPR', 'data protection', 'privacy compliance', 'DPA', 'DSAR', 'data subject request', 'cookie consent', 'privacy audit', 'CCPA', or asks 'do I need GDPR for this repo'. Scans the repository to detect what personal data is collected, classifies sensitivity, determines whether GDPR…
nda-review
Use when the user uploads or pastes a non-disclosure agreement and asks for review, redline, risk assessment, or a recommendation on whether to sign. Identifies missing standard protections, one-sided or unusual provisions, and operational issues; produces a structured report with severity ratings and citations to…