SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC information-security-manager-iso27001

ISO 27001 ISMS implementation and cybersecurity governance for HealthTech and MedTech companies. Use when designing an ISMS, running security risk assessments, implementing controls, pursuing ISO 27001 certification, preparing security audits, responding to security incidents, or verifying compliance. Covers ISO 27001, ISO 27002, healthcare security, and medical device cybersecurity.

alirezarezvani/claude-skills Agent Skills author: alirezarezvani MIT 6 files body ≈ 2 810 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 d ago

ISO 27001 ISMS implementation and cybersecurity governance for HealthTech and MedTech companies.

As a process C 57/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureSecuritytype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
93
Quality 40%
94
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
57/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 7

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 7
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/incident-response.md:25
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
      | Malware | Malicious software infection | Ransomware, virus, trojan |
      detector
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/incident-response.md:35
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      | **Critical (P1)** | Active breach, data loss, system down | Immediate (15 min) | Ransomware, confirmed breach |
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/incident-response.md:327
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      ### Ransomware Recovery
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/incident-response.md:330
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      - [ ] Identify ransomware variant
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/iso27001-controls.md:252
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      - Penetration test reports
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/risk-assessment-guide.md:79
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      | Ransomware | High | All systems | Financial |
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/risk-assessment-guide.md:131
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      2. **Penetration Testing:** Annual third-party tests

    Files scanned: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 57/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 85Steps. 81 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2810 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 386: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 25 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 81 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (12 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +3All 2 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 94.