- Home
- Skills
- Agents & Orchestration
- Security Questionnaire Response Manager
Security Questionnaire Response Manager
Builds evidence-traceable security questionnaire drafts with disclosure safeguards and contradiction tracking.
$6.99
Works with the AI Agents you already use
Security Questionnaire Response Manager
Example session with this skill installed
Draft responses for Q1-Q3 of the attached questionnaire using the v2.0 Access Policy and our 2023 SOC 2 Type II report. Q1: Do you use MFA? Q2: Is data encrypted at rest? Q3: Any breaches in 12 months?
- Read your context and instructions
- Compiled the security questionnaire response
I have analyzed Q1-Q3 against the provided Access Policy v2.0 and the 2023 SOC 2 report.
Security Questionnaire Response Package
1. Scope and Assumptions
- Customer: Internal Draft
- Product/Entity: SaaS Platform
- Evidence Sources: Access Policy v2.0 (Approved), 2023 SOC 2 Type II (Approved)
2. Source and Disclosure Register
| Evidence ID | Source and version | Applicable scope | Owner | Age/validity | Approval | Sharing rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRC-001 | Access Policy v2.0 | Production Systems | CISO | Current | Approved | Internal/NDA |
| SRC-002 | SOC 2 Type II 2023 | Core Platform | Compliance | Valid until 2024 | Approved | NDA Only |
3. Customer Question Response Matrix
| Question ID | Exact question | Draft answer | Support status | Evidence ID | Confidence | Approval state |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Do you use MFA? | MFA is enforced for all production system access via SSO. | Supported | SRC-001 | High | Pending Review |
| Q2 | Is data encrypted at rest? | Data is encrypted at rest using AES-256. See SOC 2 Section III. | Supported | SRC-002 | High | Pending Review |
| Q3 | Any breaches in 12 months? | HOLD - DO NOT SUBMIT | Unverified | N/A | Not assessed | Unresolved |
4. Unsupported Claims and Contradictions
- Assertion Q3: No evidence was provided regarding incident history.
- Impact: Missing mandatory disclosure. Requires input from Legal/Security Lead.
5. Evidence Requests and Owner Tracker
| Question | Missing evidence/decision | Owner | Priority | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q3 | 12-month incident log | Security Lead | High | Verify breach status |
Next steps
- Route Q3 to the Security Lead for the official incident statement.
- Verify that the SOC 2 report (SRC-002) is behind an NDA gate in the customer portal.
- Review the draft answer for Q1 against recent SSO configuration changes.
Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.
About this skill
B2B sales and security teams often struggle with the manual grind of customer security questionnaires. Accuracy is critical, yet evidence is often scattered across outdated policies, expired certificates, and unverified Slack messages. This skill automates the drafting process by mapping customer questions directly to your approved evidence library while maintaining strict disclosure safeguards.
What it does
- Evidence mapping connects specific customer questions to approved policies, SOC 2 reports, and ISO certificates.
- Conflict detection flags contradictions between different source documents or past responses to prevent misrepresentation.
- Confidence scoring ranks every answer as High, Medium, or Low based on the freshness and relevance of the cited evidence.
- Disclosure gating redacts sensitive technical details and secrets, ensuring only customer-safe information is included.
- Gap analysis generates an automated tracker for missing evidence with assigned owners and priority levels.
How it works
- Intake the customer questionnaire and your library of approved security evidence or previous responses.
- Analyze questions against the evidence hierarchy, prioritizing current certificates and signed policies.
- Draft a structured response package including a question matrix, source citations, and an internal review gate.
Frameworks & tools
This skill is designed for security assurance, procurement, and GRC workflows. It processes structured data from spreadsheets, portal exports, and markdown-based security knowledge bases.
Why this beats prompting it yourself
Generic prompts often "hallucinate" security controls or ignore the specific scope of an ISO certificate. This skill enforces an evidence hierarchy that prevents the agent from making unsupported claims or turning a "planned" feature into an "implemented" one.
Use cases
- Drafting responses for incoming B2B vendor security assessments.
- Auditing draft answers created by sales teams to ensure alignment with legal and security policies.
- Building a gap report to identify where your security documentation is missing or expired.
- Creating a customer-safe summary of sensitive internal security controls for a trust portal.
Known limitations
Does not perform live system testing or verify control effectiveness. Cannot make legal representations or guarantee buyer acceptance of the drafted answers.
Find more skills like this on the Claude Skills Marketplace, the Codex Skills Marketplace and the Gemini Skills Marketplace, or browse Claude Skills for Agents & Orchestration.
Does not perform live system testing or verify control effectiveness. Cannot make legal representations or guarantee buyer acceptance of the drafted answers.
How to use
- 1
Connect your agent to the Agensi MCP
Copy the prompt and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any agent that supports MCP. It sets up the connection for you. Manual setup
- 2
Sign in to Agensi
Your agent shows a sign-in link. Sign in and click Allow.
- 3
Ask for what you need
Your agent loads this skill and uses it on your task. It always asks before buying a skill.
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill goes through the trust checks below.
Security scanned
Checked by our 8-point scan before listing
Fresh listing
Recently published to Agensi
Money-back guarantee
Doesn't do what its page promises? You get your money back.
Trust & safety
Security scan
Security scan passed 12 days ago