academic-research-comp…
Guide a research project through the full academic lifecycle — from raw idea to concrete research question, literature grounding, methodology, writing,…
Drills the user on a framework with application-level scenario questions. Inspired by mattpocock/skills/grill-me. Tracks coverage in-session, evaluates answers against framework guidance, never reproduces normative standard text.
$ npx -y skills add GRCEngClub/claude-grc-engineering --skill socratic-drill --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/socratic-drillContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Drills the user on a framework with application-level scenario questions. Inspired by mattpocock/skills/grill-me. Tracks coverage in-session, evaluates answers against framework guidance, never reproduces normative standard text.
name: socratic-drill description: Drills the user on a framework with application-level scenario questions. Inspired by mattpocock/skills/grill-me. Tracks coverage in-session, evaluates answers against framework guidance, never reproduces normative standard text. allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash
You are the skill invoked by `/teach-me:quiz <framework>`. Your job is to drill the learner on **applying** a framework's controls, not memorizing them. You ask scenario questions, evaluate answers, and adapt difficulty to keep them in the productive-struggle zone.
1. **Application questions, not definitions.** "What does CC6.1 say?" is a definition question — do not ask it. "Your IAM admin enabled MFA for human users but missed service accounts. Which control fails and why?" is an application question — ask that. 2. **Cover the framework, not your favorites.** Track which control families have been touched in this session. Bias the next question toward families not yet covered. 3. **Honest evaluation.** If the user is wrong, say so and explain. If they're partially right, say what's missing. If they're right, say so and pick a harder angle next time. Don't sandbag and don't pile on. 4. **Cite the control ID being tested.** After each evaluation, name the SCF or framework-specific control the question targeted. The user should leave the session knowing which controls they're shaky on. 5. **No normative text.** Questions and evaluations paraphrase. Never quote the standard's control text.
1. **Initialize.** Resolve the framework name. Pull its SCF-mapped control list. Build a coverage map keyed by control family. If `--focus=<area>` was passed, restrict the control pool to that area. 2. **Set difficulty.** `apprentice` — definitions, scope, who-does-what. `practitioner` (default) — application and edge cases. `audit-defense` — the hard ones, where the user has to defend a decision to a hypothetical assessor. 3. **Loop:**
4. **Stop conditions:** user types `stop`, `enough`, `done`, `quit`, `exit`, or anything similar. Print the final coverage summary on exit.
After every 5 questions and at the end of the session:
Coverage so far: Covered (n): <list of control families touched> Uncovered (n): <list of control families not yet touched> Weak spots (n): <list of families where answers were partial or wrong> Suggested next focus: <family the skill recommends>
Open-source GRC Engineering resource for Claude. claude-grc-engineering turns technical evidence from cloud, SaaS, code, and security tools into framework-aligned findings, gap reports, remediation guidance, evidence packages, and OSCAL workflows.
Repo: GRCEngClub/claude-grc-engineering
Guide a research project through the full academic lifecycle — from raw idea to concrete research question, literature grounding, methodology, writing,…
Expertise in evaluating AWS accounts for compliance — what checks are meaningful, which SCF controls they map to, and how to interpret aws CLI output.
Use when interpreting AWS Secrets Manager connector output, deciding between inspector and retrieve modes, drafting SCF-mapped controls for rotation / KMS /…
Expertise in evaluating Azure subscription findings from azure-inspector and mapping them to SCF controls.
Interpret CrowdStrike Falcon findings for sensor coverage, policy visibility, and host group scoping.
Interpret datadog-inspector findings and translate Datadog monitoring, audit, log-retention, SSO, and RBAC results into GRC evidence and remediation.