SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BB implementing-cloud-dlp-for-data-protection

Implement cloud DLP using Amazon Macie, Google Cloud DLP API, Microsoft Purview, Azure Information Protection, and Nightfall AI to discover, classify, label, de-identify, and protect sensitive data (PII, PHI, financial data) across cloud storage, databases, and pipelines. Use for GDPR/HIPAA/PCI DSS data-discovery, cloud data governance, or CI/CD DLP scanning; not for endpoint, email, or network-level DLP.

mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills Agent Skills author: mukul975 Apache-2.0 4 files · 1 script body ≈ 3 924 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 d ago

Implement cloud DLP using Amazon Macie, Google Cloud DLP API, Microsoft Purview, Azure Information Protection, and Nightfall AI to discover, classify, label…

As a process B 70/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: failures and branches, running it twice, progress reporting

IntegrationGoogle CloudAzureAWSSecurityData and analyticstype 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
B
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
82
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
70/100
Nearly there
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
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 · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 4. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "domain"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "subdomain"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "nist_ai_rmf"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "atlas_techniques"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "nist_csf"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"

    Process rating: all ten parameters 70/100

    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 5 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 22 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3924 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

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
    • -31 of 1 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 408: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 15 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 22 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (8 code blocks)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.