Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

hipaa-compliance

Review US healthcare software for HIPAA privacy and security concerns. The skill guides checks on protected health information, vendor agreements, minimum necessary access, and audit records, while directing implementation and specialized review to related skills.

OriginalShow the original description

HIPAA-specific entrypoint for healthcare privacy and security work. Use when a task is explicitly framed around HIPAA, PHI handling, covered entities, BAAs, breach posture, or US healthcare compliance requirements.

See how to install

Good for

  • Reviewing AI-generated visit summaries for HIPAA concerns
  • Checking patient data flows into analytics services
  • Planning minimum necessary access and audit records
  • Checking vendor agreements before sharing patient information

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md3.5 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

HIPAA Compliance

Use this as the HIPAA-specific entrypoint when a task is clearly about US healthcare compliance. This skill intentionally stays thin and canonical:

  • healthcare-phi-compliance remains the primary implementation skill for PHI/PII handling, data classification, audit logging, encryption, and leak prevention.
  • healthcare-reviewer remains the specialized reviewer when code, architecture, or product behavior needs a healthcare-aware second pass.
  • security-review still applies for general auth, input-handling, secrets, API, and deployment hardening.

When to Use

  • The request explicitly mentions HIPAA, PHI, covered entities, business associates, or BAAs
  • Building or reviewing US healthcare software that stores, processes, exports, or transmits PHI
  • Assessing whether logging, analytics, LLM prompts, storage, or support workflows create HIPAA exposure
  • Designing patient-facing or clinician-facing systems where minimum necessary access and auditability matter

How It Works

Treat HIPAA as an overlay on top of the broader healthcare privacy skill:

  1. Start with healthcare-phi-compliance for the concrete implementation rules.
  2. Apply HIPAA-specific decision gates:
    • Is this data PHI?
    • Is this actor a covered entity or business associate?
    • Does a vendor or model provider require a BAA before touching the data?
    • Is access limited to the minimum necessary scope?
    • Are read/write/export events auditable?
  3. Escalate to healthcare-reviewer if the task affects patient safety, clinical workflows, or regulated production architecture.

HIPAA-Specific Guardrails

  • Never place PHI in logs, analytics events, crash reports, prompts, or client-visible error strings.
  • Never expose PHI in URLs, browser storage, screenshots, or copied example payloads.
  • Require authenticated access, scoped authorization, and audit trails for PHI reads and writes.
  • Treat third-party SaaS, observability, support tooling, and LLM providers as blocked-by-default until BAA status and data boundaries are clear.
  • Follow minimum necessary access: the right user should only see the smallest PHI slice needed for the task.
  • Prefer opaque internal IDs over names, MRNs, phone numbers, addresses, or other identifiers.

Examples

Example 1: Product request framed as HIPAA

User request:

Add AI-generated visit summaries to our clinician dashboard. We serve US clinics and need to stay HIPAA compliant.

Response pattern:

  • Activate hipaa-compliance
  • Use healthcare-phi-compliance to review PHI movement, logging, storage, and prompt boundaries
  • Verify whether the summarization provider is covered by a BAA before any PHI is sent
  • Escalate to healthcare-reviewer if the summaries influence clinical decisions

Example 2: Vendor/tooling decision

User request:

Can we send support transcripts and patient messages into our analytics stack?

Response pattern:

  • Assume those messages may contain PHI
  • Block the design unless the analytics vendor is approved for HIPAA-bound workloads and the data path is minimized
  • Require redaction or a non-PHI event model when possible

Related Skills

  • healthcare-phi-compliance
  • healthcare-reviewer
  • healthcare-emr-patterns
  • healthcare-eval-harness
  • security-review

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

accessibility

FreeSummary

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Investigate unreliable AI agents across 12 layers, including instructions, memory, tool execution, and display. Use code and logs to trace failures, rank findings by severity, and produce an ordered repair plan that prioritizes code changes.

  • Investigating failures that appear only inside an agent application
  • Tracing old conversation content leaking into new sessions
  • Checking skipped or falsely claimed tool execution
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-eval

FreeSummary

Compare coding agents on tasks from your own codebase. Define success checks, run agents in separate Git working directories, and report pass rates, available API costs, completion time, and consistency across repeated trials.

  • Comparing coding agents on real development tasks
  • Evaluating a new tool or model before adoption
  • Checking performance after agent updates
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose failed AI agent runs by capturing errors, checking likely causes, and choosing small, reversible recovery actions. The workflow produces a structured report of the failure, recovery steps, and evidence, helping explain repeated retries or stalled progress.

  • Diagnosing repeated tool calls with no progress
  • Investigating quality loss as context grows
  • Checking file paths and environment mismatches
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose AI agent runs that fail repeatedly, loop through tools, or lose track of the task. Capture errors and environment details, test a focused recovery action, and produce a report explaining the evidence and outcome.

  • Diagnosing repeated failures in an agent run
  • Investigating loops through the same tool calls
  • Reviewing output degradation as context grows
affaan-m/ECC283.3KUpdated Oct 5, 2026

See all skills by affaan-m

Report a problem with this skill