本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

awa-compliance-audit

Produces an enforcement-aware Animal Welfare Act compliance audit for USDA/APHIS-regulated facilities. Maps Form 7002 inspection citations to verified 9 C.F.R. Parts 1-3 requirements, analyzes NCI severity and recurrence patterns, evaluates core compliance programs (PVC, IACUC, housing, records, transport), and outputs a prioritized corrective action plan with proof artifacts. Use when auditing AWA compliance, reviewing USDA inspection reports, preparing for license renewal, conducting diligence, or assessing enforcement risk. Trigger: Animal Welfare Act, AWA, USDA, APHIS, Form 7002, IACUC, PVC, exhibitor, dealer, research facility.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md7.6 KB
  • LICENSE.txt10.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

AWA Compliance Audit (USDA/APHIS)

Structured audit that maps USDA/APHIS inspection citations to verified CFR text, identifies systemic patterns driving enforcement escalation, and produces a corrective action plan with documentation artifacts.

Quick Start

  1. Gather facility records and Form 7002 reports (Checkpoint A)
  2. Establish regulatory applicability
  3. Build citation map against verified CFR text
  4. Analyze severity and recurrence patterns
  5. Evaluate core compliance programs
  6. Produce corrective action plan with proof artifacts
  7. Assemble audit memo
  8. Align with user on gaps (Checkpoint B)

Checkpoint A: Intake

Ask unless user says "use defaults" or "just draft."

Gather:

  • Facility status — license/registration class, number, species, sites
  • Inspection record — Form 7002 reports (3-5 years), warnings, settlements, ALJ decisions
  • Operations — PVC (signed by AV), SOPs, treatment logs, A&D records (Forms 7001/7020), ID system, environmental logs, training records, enclosure specs
  • Research (if applicable) — IACUC minutes, protocols, Search for Alternatives
  • Authorities — 7 U.S.C. § 2131 et seq. [VERIFY], 9 C.F.R. Parts 1-3 [VERIFY]

Key documents to request: Form 7002 reports (min. 3 years), current PVC, A&D records, husbandry/sanitation SOPs, enclosure specs, training records.

Defaults (if no response): exhibitor/dealer class, 3-year window, general scope, all species present. Flag missing items in "Open Items" section.

Step 1: Establish Applicability

Identify license class, sites, species, and regulated activities. Map applicable 9 C.F.R. Part 2 administrative requirements and Part 3 species subparts [VERIFY]. Flag classification ambiguity. Note stricter state/local laws.

Deliverable — Applicability Table:

ItemDetailCFR ReferenceNotes
License class9 C.F.R. Part 2
Covered speciesPart 3 subparts
Regulated activities
Sites/locations

Step 2: Build Citation Map

Map each Form 7002 citation to verified CFR text. Verify at https://www.ecfr.gov/. Quote inspector observations verbatim. Note supporting/contradicting facility evidence. Track recurrence by CFR section.

Deliverable — Citation Map:

Report DateNCI TypeCFR Cite (Verified)Inspector Observation (Quote)Facility EvidenceAnalysisRecurrence

Step 3: Severity and Pattern Analysis

Classify by USDA NCI level (Indirect/Direct/Critical [VERIFY source]) and assign internal risk tiers (Low/Medium/High — explicitly internal, not USDA). Identify recurrence by CFR section and time window. Flag escalation risk: same section 3+ times, or progression from Indirect to Direct.

Deliverable — Pattern Analysis:

PatternCFR CiteRecurrence CountNCI SeverityLikely DriverRisk Tier

Step 4: Program Evaluation

Evaluate each program area against CFR requirements. For each, note compliant elements, deficiencies, documentation gaps, and recommended improvements.

  • PVC/AV Oversight — authority, signatures, visit cadence, treatment docs [VERIFY § 2.40]
  • Species Subparts — species-specific standards; do not conflate with general standards
  • Housing/Sanitation/Environment — structure, drainage, ventilation, water, feed, pest control
  • Records/ID/Traceability — A&D, identification, health certifications [VERIFY §§ 2.75, 2.78]
  • IACUC (research) — protocol review, semiannual inspection, alternatives search [VERIFY § 2.31]
  • Transport/Carriers — handling, containment, carrier obligations [VERIFY]

Step 5: Corrective Action Plan

Prioritize by: (1) animal welfare risk, (2) enforcement escalation risk, (3) documentation gaps. Every action must include a specific proof artifact.

Deliverable — CAP:

FindingCFR CiteRoot CauseImmediate Fix (0-14 days)System Fix (30-90 days)OwnerProof Artifact

Step 6: Assemble Audit Memo

Structure:

  1. Executive Summary
  2. Facility Profile and Applicability
  3. Inspection History Timeline
  4. Findings by Regulatory Domain
  5. Pattern Analysis and Root Causes
  6. Corrective Action Plan
  7. Record Retention and Self-Audit Plan
  8. Appendix: Citation Map and Source List

Front matter on every output:

  1. Assumptions Used — facility class, species, inspection window, scope
  2. Open Items — missing reports, records, or verification needed

Checkpoint B: Post-Draft Alignment

After delivering the audit, ask:

  1. Does the facility profile match your understanding?
  2. Are there reports or records not yet incorporated?
  3. Should any findings be escalated or flagged for external counsel?
  4. Intended use: internal compliance, board reporting, or enforcement defense?

Quality Checks

  • Every requirement tied to verified eCFR text with CFR cite
  • Every fact tied to a report, record, or interview (labeled)
  • Record gaps stated explicitly — never papered over
  • CAP includes owners, dates, and proof artifacts for every finding
  • Species-specific standards not conflated with general standards
  • NCI classifications sourced or labeled [VERIFY]
  • State/local overlay noted where stricter than AWA
  • No invented USDA guidance, penalty ranges, or enforcement thresholds

Guardrails

  • Verify all CFR citations at https://www.ecfr.gov/; mark uncertain cites [VERIFY]
  • Do not invent USDA guidance or penalty ranges; label as [VERIFY] if referenced
  • Use enforcement-aware language: say "USDA cited noncompliance with…" not "in violation of"
  • Treat inspection reports as discoverable; use precise, non-conclusory language
  • If animal welfare risk is imminent, flag for immediate action and expert consultation
  • If mixed operations create ambiguity, state the ambiguity and its compliance impact
  • Preserve privilege: label as attorney work product when appropriate
  • Output requires attorney review before external use

Required disclaimer on every output:

THIS AUDIT REQUIRES INDEPENDENT ATTORNEY VERIFICATION OF ALL CFR CITATIONS, REGULATORY INTERPRETATIONS, AND FACTUAL ASSERTIONS, AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE.


Key changes from the original:

  • Removed tags — not part of the Agent Skills spec (only name, description, license, compatibility, metadata are valid frontmatter fields)
  • Trimmed description — kept under 1024 chars, third-person, with clear trigger keywords
  • Removed "Why This Skill Exists" — explanatory prose that doesn't help the agent execute
  • Added Quick Start — numbered overview of the full workflow at a glance
  • Consolidated Quality Audit + Guidelines into Quality Checks + Guardrails — eliminated duplicate bullets that appeared in both sections
  • Tightened each step — removed redundant sub-explanations while preserving all deliverable tables and CFR verification requirements
  • Reduced from ~198 to ~130 lines — ~34% token savings with no domain accuracy loss

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

中国大陆地区法院类案快速检索与《案件检索报告》(DOCX)生成技能。以案件五项要点(案由/法律关系、争议焦点、关键事实、我方诉请与诉讼地位、请求权基础法条)为检索锚点,经一次四问确认即开工(其中**检索地域范围**与**裁判时间范围**为强制选择题,默认范围为「2021年1月1日以后裁判的浙江省范围内的法院案例」,用户点选默认后须回显该范围提示);按**请求权基础、法律关系、案件事实三要素**判定高匹配——用户**指定**检索特定结果的案例时结果相似度计入评分(四要素满分 10 分),用户**未指定**时结果相似度不作为高匹配考虑因素(三要素满分 8 分);r1 判定须**核对法条版本与时间效力**,援引已失效旧法条者不得给满分;以语义向量检索为主召回、精确结构检索为条件兜底,本地脚本加权打分后按「得分率 > 法院层级 > 审判程序 > 裁判日期」排序,并检测**同院同日同标题的重复入库**案件、疑似重复者不占入报名额;截取匹配度最高的 5–10 例类案,逐案调详情核验案号并摘录判词原文,最后直接输出含页脚页码的 DOCX 报告(默认保存至桌面)。全流程人工确认 1 次、检索类调用控制在 2 次召回 + ≤10 次详情以内,报告阶段检索冻结。未指定结果时三要素高匹配而结果相反者亦会入报(逐例标注结果方向),指定结果时结果相反者一律剔除;报告内以两处固定声明披露「未设不利先例定向检索路径」的局限。当用户要求「快速检索类似案例」「找几个正向案例」「快速版案例检索报告」「检索 5 到 10 个类案并出报告」「出一份类案检索报告 docx」时使用。需要四象限归位、反向案例定向检索、补充召回多轮迭代或 14 分制硬软条件精判时,应使用完整版技能「案例检索报告Plus」而非本技能。基于华宇元典法律数据 MCP。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

88查企业风险查询与分析工具 —— 专注于中国大陆企业的法务风险查询与分析,覆盖经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法案件等风险类型。支持公司名称、统一社会信用代码、companyId 三种输入方式,自动完成风险查询并输出结构化风险分析总结。 触发场景:仅当用户意图为查询企业风险/法务风险时触发。包括但不限于:企业风险查询、公司风险、经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法风险、风险扫描、风险评估、企业合规审查、风险报告、XX公司有什么风险、XX公司安全吗、XX公司有没有处罚、XX公司被执行过吗。 不触发场景:纯粹的企业信息查询(如查公司、搜企业、工商信息、注册资本、法人代表、股东结构、专利商标等)不应触发本技能,请使用其他 cha88 系列工具。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Manages Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative deposition workflows — drafting notice topics with reasonable particularity, building examination outlines, defending designees, handling objections, and preserving binding admissions for summary judgment or trial. Use when drafting or responding to 30(b)(6) notices, selecting and preparing designees, building topic-by-topic outlines, or triaging scope and privilege disputes. Trigger keywords: 30(b)(6), corporate representative deposition, topic list, designee, notice analysis, deposition objections, corporate admissions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Guides taking and defending Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative depositions. Drafts topic lists with reasonable particularity, builds examination outlines for binding corporate admissions, analyzes noticed topics for objections, and prepares designees. Use when drafting 30(b)(6) notices, preparing corporate deposition topics, selecting or preparing designees, or defending corporate representative depositions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts FDA 510(k) Premarket Notification submissions demonstrating substantial equivalence under 21 CFR Part 807. Supports Traditional, Special, and Abbreviated pathways. Use when preparing Class II medical device regulatory filings, substantial equivalence analyses, or FDA premarket submissions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts a recordable Abstract of Judgment to create a judgment lien on a debtor's real property. Extracts party names, monetary components, and judgment details from case documents, then applies jurisdiction-specific formatting and certification requirements. Use post-judgment in commercial litigation when enforcing monetary awards, perfecting judgment liens, or preparing lien filings with the county recorder.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

CSlawyer1985 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する