AC hipaa-compliance
Expert HIPAA compliance assistant for healthcare and software contexts. Use this skill whenever the user mentions HIPAA, PHI (Protected Health Information), ePHI, covered entities, business associates, healthcare data privacy, medical records, health information security, BAA (Business Associate Agreements), or any compliance review involving patient data. Also trigger for requests to draft privacy notices, HIPAA policies, consent forms, security risk assessments, or breach notification letters. Use for developers building healthcare software who need technical safeguard guidance (encryption, access controls, audit logs), compliance officers reviewing documents or procedures, and anyone asking "is this HIPAA compliant?" or "what does HIPAA require for X?". When in doubt about whether a healthcare or data privacy question falls under this skill — use it.
Expert HIPAA compliance assistant for healthcare and software contexts.
As a process C 52/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
How to improve
- 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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/breach-notification.md:289Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Ransomware encrypts ePHI | **Likely yes** | Access/acquisition occurred; must conduct risk assessment; difficult to rebut |
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/templates.md:500Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Ransomware | No offsite backup | H | H | HIGH | Daily local backup | HIGH | Implement offsite/cloud backup |
Files scanned: 7. 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 52/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (hipaa-compliance) differs from the folder (hipaa-compliance-tanaji-hemant-naik)
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 36 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1746 tokens
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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Description length 865: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 2 example trigger phrases
- +4Structure: 12 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 36 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 91.