# Ai Act Compliance

> Use when the user asks about EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) compliance — classifying an AI system's risk tier (art. 5 prohibited / art. 6 + Annex III high-risk / art. 50 limited / minimal), evaluating conformity for high-risk AI (art. 8–17, 26–27), drafting Annex IV technical documentation, conducting a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (art. 27), checking AI literacy obligations (art. 4), d…

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-abk1969-ai-act-skills-ai-act-compliance`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [abk1969](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/abk1969)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [AI & ML](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/ai-and-ml)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** MIT
- **Upstream author:** [abk1969](https://github.com/abk1969)
- **Source:** https://github.com/abk1969/ai-act-skills/tree/main/skills/ai-act-compliance
- **Website:** https://github.com/abk1969/ai-act-skills/releases/latest

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-abk1969-ai-act-skills-ai-act-compliance
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# AI Act Compliance — EU Regulation 2024/1689

## What this skill does

Codifies actionable EU AI Act compliance expertise. Every output is **traceable** to one or more of:

1. **Regulation (EU) 2024/1689** — *the AI Act* — the legally binding source.
2. **ISO/IEC 42001:2023** — Artificial Intelligence Management System (AIMS), the certifiable management standard for AI providers and deployers.
3. **ISO/IEC 27090:2025** — Cybersecurity guidance for AI systems (the depth standard for AI Act art. 15 cybersecurity).
4. **Companion ISO standards**: 23894 (AI risk management), 23053 (ML framework), 5338 (AI lifecycle), 5259-* (data quality), 24029-2 (robustness), 42005 (impact assessment), 42006 (audit & certification).
5. **CEN-CENELEC JTC 21** harmonised standards (under standardization mandate M/593) — the path to art. 40 presumption of conformity.
6. **GPAI Code of Practice** — the de-facto instrument operationalizing arts. 53–55 until harmonised standards land.

This skill is **decision-support**, not legal advice. Always recommend the user consult qualified counsel for binding interpretation, and a notified body for conformity assessment of high-risk AI systems.

## Scheduling at a glance — SSL machine view

This skill is paired with a machine-readable manifest at [`ssl.json`](./ssl.json), built per the **Scheduling-Structural-Logical (SSL)** representation introduced by Liang et al., *From Skill Text to Skill Structure* (arXiv:2604.24026, 2026). The manifest exposes the skill's invocation interface, scene graph, and atomic action evidence so registries, routers, and reviewers do not need to re-parse this document. The table below is the human-readable scheduling view; `ssl.json` is the authoritative typed version.

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| `skill_id` | `SKILL_AI_ACT_COMPLIANCE` |
| `skill_goal` | Produce traceable EU AI Act compliance guidance — risk classification, obligation mapping, ISO 42001 / 27090 anchoring, deliverable identification — for a named AI system and a named role (provider / deployer / importer / distributor / authorised rep). |
| `top_pattern` | `ROUTE_AND_ANCHOR` (route the question to the relevant reference; anchor every obligation to article + clause + Annex A control). |
| `tags` | `eu-ai-act`, `regulation-2024-1689`, `iso-42001`, `iso-27090`, `aims`, `gpai`, `fria`, `annex-iii`, `annex-iv`, `art-5`, `art-50`, `art-73`, `compliance`, `governance`, `decision-support` |
| `intent_signature` (samples) | "Is this AI system high-risk?", "What ISO 42001 control covers art. 9?", "Do I need a FRIA?", "How do I report a serious AI incident?", "Does art. 4 AI literacy apply to my org?", "Is fine-tuning a foundation model substantial modification?", "When does the GPAI systemic-risk regime kick in?", "Can I run my AI in an EU regulatory sandbox?" |
| `expected_inputs` | `system_description: str`, `role: enum{provider, deployer, importer, distributor, authorised_rep}`, `sector: str`, `end_users: str`, `is_gpai: bool`, `compute_flops?: float`, `is_substantially_modified?: bool`, `incident_summary?: str` (RECOVER scene only) |
| `expected_outputs` | `tier: enum{unacceptable, high, limited, minimal}`, `pathway: enum{annex_i, annex_iii, art_50, none}`, `obligations_list: list[citation]`, `iso_anchors: list[control]`, `deliverables: list[artifact]`, `effective_date: date`, `legal_disclaimer: str` |
| `dependencies` | `permission: filesystem.read` (reference files); `capability: legal_decision_support`; **no** network or credentials access; **no** code execution. |
| `control_flow_features` | branching: yes (tier × role × system_kind matrix); loops: no; tool calls: no; touches sensitive resources: no |
| `entry_scene_id` | `S_PREPARE_SCOPE` |
| `subscenes` | `S_PREPARE_SCOPE`, `S_ACQUIRE_FACTS`, `S_REASON_TIER`, `S_ACT_OBLIGATIONS`, `S_VERIFY_ARTIFACTS`, `S_RECOVER_INCIDENT`, `S_FINALIZE_REPORT` |

## When to invoke this skill

Invoke when the user mentions or implies any of:

- **Risk classification**: "Is this AI system high-risk?", "minimal vs limited risk", "Annex III", "art. 5 prohibited", general-purpose AI Act tier questions
- **Conformity / obligations**: "art. 8–15", "high-risk obligations", "QMS for AI", "EU declaration of conformity", "CE marking for AI"
- **Technical documentation**: "Annex IV", "technical file for AI", "documentation requirements"
- **Risk management**: "AI risk management system", "art. 9", "risk register for AI", "ISO 23894"
- **Data governance**: "art. 10", "training data quality", "bias mitigation", "ISO 5259"
- **Transparency**: "art. 13", "art. 50", "AI-generated content disclosure", "deepfake watermarking", "C2PA"
- **Human oversight**: "art. 14", "human-in-the-loop", "human-on-the-loop"
- **Cybersecurity for AI**: "art. 15", "AI security", "adversarial robustness", "data poisoning", "prompt injection", "ISO 27090"
- **FRIA**: "Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment", "art. 27", "ISO 42005"
- **AI literacy**: "art. 4", "AI literacy programme", "staff training for AI"
- **Substantial modification**: "art. 25", "fine-tuning a foundation model", "provider-flip", "intended-purpose change"
- **Sandboxes & real-world testing**: "art. 57 sandbox", "art. 60 real-world testing", "AI Office sandbox", "Member State sandbox"
- **Right to explanation**: "art. 86", "individual decision explanation"
- **Post-market**: "art. 72", "post-market monitoring of AI", "AI incident reporting", "art. 73"
- **GPAI**: "art. 51", "art. 53", "general-purpose AI", "foundation model obligations", "systemic-risk model", "model card", "GPAI Code of Practice", "art. 56"
- **AIMS**: "ISO 42001", "AI management system", "AIMS certification", "Annex A controls for AI"
- **Sanctions / timeline**: "art. 99", "AI Act fines", "AI Act effective date", "2026-08-02", "2027-08-02"

## Core taxonomy (memorize this)

### Four-tier risk model (art. 5/6 + Annex III + art. 50)

| Tier | Trigger | Regime | Article |
|------|---------|--------|---------|
| **Unacceptable** | Subliminal techniques, social scoring, untargeted facial scraping, biometric categorisation by sensitive attributes, real-time public biometric ID by law enforcement (with narrow exceptions), emotion recognition in workplace/education, exploitation of vulnerabilities, predictive policing of natural persons | **Banned** (effective 2025-02-02) | Art. 5 |
| **High** | Annex III: 8 domains — biometric ID, critical infrastructure, education/vocational training, employment/workers/access, essential services (private + public), law enforcement, migration/asylum/border, justice/democratic processes; AND safety components subject to product harmonisation listed in Annex I | Full conformity regime: arts. 8–15 (provider) + arts. 16–17 (provider) + arts. 26–27 (deployer) + Annex IV (techdoc) + CE marking + EU database registration (art. 49) | Art. 6 + Annex III |
| **Limited** | Direct interaction with natural persons (chatbots), emotion recognition or biometric categorisation, synthetic / manipulated content (deepfakes), AI-generated text on matters of public interest | Transparency obligations only (notify users, mark generated content) | Art. 50 |
| **Minimal** | Everything else | Voluntary codes of conduct (art. 95) | — |

**General-Purpose AI (GPAI)** is a separate axis: arts. 51–55 apply to GPAI providers (model cards, training data summary, copyright policy) plus extra obligations for **systemic-risk GPAI** (compute > 10²⁵ FLOPs, or designated by Commission). The **GPAI Code of Practice** (art. 56) is the de-facto compliance instrument.

### Universal obligations (apply regardless of tier)

| Obligation | Article | Effective | Scope |
|---|---|---|---|
| **AI literacy** | art. 4 | **2025-02-02** | All providers AND deployers — measures to ensure sufficient AI literacy of staff and other persons dealing with the operation/use of AI systems on their behalf |
| **Voluntary codes** | art. 95 | 2026-08-02 | Encouraged for non-high-risk; can extend high-risk obligations voluntarily |

### Provider vs Deployer (art. 3 definitions)

- **Provider** (art. 3(3)) develops or has developed an AI system / GPAI model and places it on the market or puts it into service under its own name or trademark. Carries the bulk of the regulatory load (arts. 8–22, 49–52).
- **Deployer** (art. 3(4)) uses an AI system under its authority (except personal non-professional use). Carries arts. 26 (use obligations) and 27 (FRIA for selected high-risk uses).
- Importer (art. 3(6)), Distributor (art. 3(7)), Authorised representative (art. 3(5)) — derived obligations in arts. 22–24.
- **Substantial modification** (art. 25) flips the deployer to provider — see `references/12-art25-substantial-modification.md`.

### Sanctions tiers (art. 99)

| Tier | Cap | Applies to |
|------|-----|------------|
| **1** | **€35M or 7% global turnover** (whichever higher) | Art. 5 prohibited practices |
| **2** | **€15M or 3%** | Most other provisions (arts. 8–17, 26–29, 50, 53–55, etc.) |
| **3** | **€7.5M or 1.5%** | Supplying incorrect / incomplete / misleading info to authorities or notified bodies |

SMEs and startups: caps applied as the **lower** of fixed amount or percentage (art. 99(6)).

### Application timeline (art. 113)

| Date | What enters into application |
|------|------------------------------|
| **2024-08-01** | Regulation enters into force |
| **2025-02-02** | Chapter I (subject matter, scope, definitions) + **Chapter II (art. 5 prohibitions)** + **art. 4 AI literacy** |
| **2025-08-02** | Chapter III Section 4 (notifying authorities & notified bodies) + Chapter V (GPAI) + Chapter VII (governance) + Chapter XII (penalties, except art. 101 GPAI penalties) + art. 78 confidentiality |
| **2026-08-02** | **Full application** — all remaining articles (the bulk of high-risk obligations + art. 50 transparency + art. 57 sandboxes + art. 95 codes) |
| **2027-08-02** | Art. 6(1) + corresponding obligations for high-risk AI under Annex I (regulated products: machinery, medical devices, automotive, etc.) |

## Decision tree — where to route

```
User question category                              → Reference file
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
"What risk tier? Is this prohibited? Is this        → references/01-risk-classification.md
 high-risk? When does art. 50 apply?"

"What obligations apply once classified high-risk?" → references/02-high-risk-obligations.md
"art. 8–15", "art. 16–22", "art. 26–29"

"How does AI Act map to ISO 42001? AIMS clauses,    → references/03-iso-42001-aims.md
 Annex A controls, certification scope"

"AI cybersecurity, art. 15 cyber, adversarial,      → references/04-iso-27090-ai-security.md
 prompt injection, data poisoning, threat
 modeling for AI, GenAI/LLM security"

"Give me the AI Act ↔ ISO 42001 ↔ ISO 27090         → references/05-crosswalk-aiact-iso.md
 mapping table"

"Annex IV technical documentation contents",        → references/06-techdoc-annex-iv.md
"art. 11 + Annex IV"

"FRIA, art. 27, fundamental rights impact",         → references/07-fria-art27.md
"AI system impact assessment per ISO 42005"

"art. 50 transparency, deepfakes, marking           → references/08-transparency-art50.md
 AI-generated content, C2PA, watermarking"

"art. 72 post-market monitoring, art. 73 serious    → references/09-post-market-art72-73.md
 incident reporting, drift detection"

"GPAI, art. 51–55, foundation models, model         → references/10-gpai-and-timeline.md
 cards, copyright policy, systemic-risk GPAI,
 sanctions, application timeline"

"art. 4 AI literacy, staff training requirement"    → references/11-art4-ai-literacy.md

"art. 25 substantial modification,                   → references/12-art25-substantial-modification.md
 provider/deployer role flip"

"art. 57 regulatory sandbox, art. 60 real-world      → references/13-sandboxes-and-real-world-testing.md
 testing outside sandbox"

"art. 56 GPAI Code of Practice, art. 95 voluntary    → references/14-codes-and-right-to-explanation.md
 codes of conduct, art. 86 right to explanation"

"How does this skill run on Gemini CLI / OpenAI       → references/15-platform-compatibility.md
 Codex? Install paths, activation, tool mapping"
```

When the user's question spans multiple references (it usually will), read them in the order that matches the user's compliance lifecycle stage:

1. Classification → 2. Obligations → 5. Crosswalk → 3. AIMS → 4. Security → 6. TechDoc → 7. FRIA → 8. Transparency → 9. Post-market → 10. GPAI/timeline → 11. AI literacy → 12. Substantial modification → 13. Sandboxes/real-world testing → 14. Codes & right to explanation → 15. Platform compatibility (when the user asks about runtime / install).

## Platform compatibility

This skill is **runtime-agnostic** by design. The regulatory content
(SKILL.md + 15 references + ssl.json) is identical across hosts —
only discovery and activation differ.

| Runtime | Status | Discovery file | Install path |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Claude Code** | ✅ first-class | `SKILL.md` frontmatter | `~/.claude/skills/ai-act-compliance/` |
| **Gemini CLI** | ✅ supported | `GEMINI.md` (root + skill) | `~/.gemini/skills/ai-act-compliance/` |
| **OpenAI Codex** | ✅ supported | `AGENTS.md` (root + skill) | `~/.agents/skills/ai-act-compliance/` |
| Copilot CLI / Cursor | 🟡 community | `AGENTS.md` | varies |

Why portability is trivial here: `ssl.json` declares
`control_flow_features.tool_calls: false` and
`touches_sensitive_resources: false`. The skill instructs the host model
to **read its own reference files** and **emit citation-grade text** —
both universal across LLM runtimes. No tool-name translation table is
needed.

Full per-platform install steps, activation contract, and smoke-test
procedure: see `references/15-platform-compatibility.md`.

## Workflow — SSL scene structure

The workflow is realized as **seven typed scenes** matching the SSL Structural Layer vocabulary (`PREPARE`, `ACQUIRE`, `REASON`, `ACT`, `VERIFY`, `RECOVER`, `FINALIZE`). Entry: `S_PREPARE_SCOPE`. The full graph (transitions, terminal targets `END_SUCCESS` / `END_FAIL`, contained logic steps) is defined in [`ssl.json`](./ssl.json).

### S_PREPARE_SCOPE (PREPARE)

**Goal**: Establish the regulatory subject. Determine three facts before any classification.

1. **Role** (art. 3): Provider / Deployer / Importer / Distributor / Authorised Rep. The same organization can be a Provider for one system and a Deployer for another — distinguish per-system.
2. **System kind**: AI system (art. 3(1)) and/or GPAI model (art. 3(63)). Both regimes can apply.
3. **Substantial-modification trigger** (art. 25): if the user is fine-tuning, retraining, or repurposing a third-party system, the deployer→provider flip may apply. Route to `references/12-art25-substantial-modification.md`.

**Exit**: `$role`, `$system_kind`, `$modification_flag` set. → `S_ACQUIRE_FACTS`.
**Yield_fail conditions**: user cannot articulate role/system → ask 1 targeted question, otherwise `END_FAIL` ("classification cannot proceed without role + system").

### S_ACQUIRE_FACTS (ACQUIRE)

**Goal**: Gather the 14 classification signals.

Read `references/01-risk-classification.md` § 2 (the 14-signal questionnaire). If signals are missing, ask the user 2–3 targeted questions covering: sector, end-users, decision consequences, sensitive data, autonomy/oversight, geographical scope.

**Exit**: 14 signals populated (or marked unknown with explicit caveat). → `S_REASON_TIER`.

### S_REASON_TIER (REASON)

**Goal**: Apply the four-tier rubric + GPAI axis.

1. Compare signals against **art. 5** prohibitions (8 categories) — if match without carve-out → `tier = unacceptable`, terminate scene chain at `END_SUCCESS` with refusal output.
2. Compare against **art. 6(1)** Annex I trigger — if match → `tier = high`, `pathway = annex_i`.
3. Compare against **art. 6(2)** Annex III §1–§8 — if match, evaluate **art. 6(3) derogation** (a/b/c/d) — disabled if profiling natural persons (GDPR art. 4(4)).
4. Compare agai

…

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [abk1969](https://github.com/abk1969)
- **Source:** [abk1969/ai-act-skills](https://github.com/abk1969/ai-act-skills)
- **License:** MIT
- **Homepage:** https://github.com/abk1969/ai-act-skills/releases/latest

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-abk1969-ai-act-skills-ai-act-compliance
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/abk1969
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.