--- name: bosskuai-legal-compliance title: BosskuAI Legal / Compliance description: Use this for product-facing legal and compliance readiness such as privacy posture, consent, retention, vendor/data obligations, policy alignment, and identifying when qualified human legal review is required. author: wankimmy author_url: https://github.com/wankimmy/Bossku-AI/tree/main/skills/bosskuai-legal-compliance license: MIT version: 0.1.1 execution_mode: open jurisdiction: general practice: data-protection language: en --- # BosskuAI Legal / Compliance Use this skill when the main question is **whether product, data, or operational behavior creates policy, privacy, or compliance obligations** that need to be surfaced early. ## How this differs from nearby skills - **`bosskuai-cybersecurity-risk`**: focuses on security, abuse, and trust boundaries; this skill focuses on policy, regulatory, and contractual obligations around the product. - **`bosskuai-product-strategy`**: decides what to ship; this skill checks which compliance constraints shape that decision. - **`bosskuai-prompt-injection-defense`**: secures the AI workspace itself; this skill reviews legal/compliance implications in the product or business process. - **`bosskuai-malaysia-pdpa-privacy`**: Malaysian PDPA specifics (breach notice, DPO, portability); this skill is jurisdiction-neutral issue-spotting. ## Mindset - This is not legal advice; it is structured issue-spotting and readiness analysis. - The goal is to surface obligations early enough that the team can involve qualified humans before shipping. - Privacy, consent, retention, and vendor commitments are product requirements, not paperwork after launch. - Ambiguous jurisdiction, data category, or contractual duty should trigger escalation, not confident guesswork. ## Compliance lenses **Data and privacy** - What personal, sensitive, or regulated data is collected or inferred? - What is the lawful basis, consent model, or user expectation? - Are retention and deletion behaviors defined? **User-facing obligations** - Are notices, consent, age gates, disclosures, or terms required? - Do product flows behave consistently with published policy? - Are user rights flows operationally possible? **Operational and vendor obligations** - Which vendors process data and under what terms? - Are cross-border transfers, subprocessors, or DPAs relevant? - Do internal roles and approvals exist for compliance-critical changes? **Product and market scope** - Which geographies, industries, or customer segments trigger stronger obligations? - Are there regulated workflows such as health, finance, education, employment, or children’s data? - What is intentionally unsupported and should be stated clearly? **Escalation triggers** - Is there ambiguity about jurisdiction, regulated data, contract commitments, or enforcement risk? - Would a mistake materially affect user rights, revenue, or launch timing? - If yes, escalate to qualified legal/compliance humans. ## Workflow 1. **Read the actual product and policy surface** — flows, forms, data handling docs, privacy copy, vendor lists, and security/compliance docs if present. 2. **Identify the regulated or policy-sensitive data and workflows** — collection, storage, sharing, retention, deletion, and consent. 3. **Map obligations to product behavior** — what the product says, what it does, and where they diverge. 4. **Review vendor and operational dependencies** — processors, transfers, contracts, approvals, and auditability. 5. **Identify escalation triggers** — what must go to qualified humans before launch or contract signature. 6. **Recommend the smallest compliance-hardening slice** — policy alignment, retention control, consent fix, documentation gap, or review gate. ## Guardrails - Do not present this skill as legal advice. - Do not guess jurisdiction-specific obligations when the facts are unclear. - Do not assume a privacy policy fixes product behavior that contradicts it. - Do not recommend shipping through unresolved high-risk compliance ambiguity. ## Output format ```text Compliance summary: Product/workflow in scope: [summary] Data categories: [list] Likely obligation areas: [privacy / retention / consent / vendor / contracts / market-specific] Observed gaps: [gap] — [why it matters] — [risk if unresolved] Escalation triggers: [issue] — [who should review] Recommended next step: [smallest safe compliance-hardening action] Non-legal-advice note: [explicit reminder to escalate where needed] ``` ## References - `../../references/checklists/legal-compliance-checklist.md`