A new regulatory requirement
Defines the operational duties arising from a regulation, including timing, ownership and supporting evidence. Provides a procedure and control matrix that make the requirements usable by delivery teams.
— Operations & Process
Decomposes a policy or regulation into individual obligations with owner, deadline and evidence, writes them up as an operational procedure, and tests your current process against each to expose gaps.
1–2 days → ~15 minutes
For one complete, review-ready pass
No coding required
— USE CASES
Defines the operational duties arising from a regulation, including timing, ownership and supporting evidence. Provides a procedure and control matrix that make the requirements usable by delivery teams.
Turns policy language into a consistent operational procedure with clear responsibilities, required records and escalation arrangements. Reduces ambiguity about what each team is accountable for.
Compares an existing process with the obligations in a policy, regulation or standard. Identifies unmet requirements and provides a gap list with proposed remediation.
Links obligations to controls, responsible owners and evidence requirements. Gives reviewers a clear basis for assessing whether operational arrangements address the source requirements.
— HOW IT BEHAVES
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Findings on the end-to-end process are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a process step.
Each process step is assessed against explicit criteria you control, so the same standard is applied across the end-to-end process on every run.
Process steps are compared on the same dimensions, which makes differences meaningful rather than impressionistic.
Facts and fields are lifted out of process documentation and run data and held in a consistent shape, process step by process step.
Policies and regulations describe requirements, but often leave operational teams to interpret what compliance means in practice. In practice it shows up as a new regulatory requirement: defines the operational duties arising from a regulation, including timing, ownership and supporting evidence. Provides a procedure and control matrix that make the requirements usable by delivery teams. It is the kind of work that decides whether a recommendation survives scrutiny — and the kind that quietly eats 1–2 days of senior time whenever it comes round.
As a Skill, the work is already sequenced. You bring the evidence, and the run produces clause-linked obligations register with actions, deadlines and evidence requirements plus operational procedure with responsibilities, controls, records and escalation arrangements. The criteria, ordering and review points that make the answer trustworthy are encoded in the Skill itself — which is the difference between a structured method and a prompt someone pastes in. The practical effect: 1–2 days of manual work becomes a ~15 minutes run, held to an identical standard on the tenth engagement as on the first.
Policy-to-process translator exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
Identifies where adoption of a new system, process or way of working stalls after go-live, with an evidence-backed report on barriers, workarounds and differences between functions.
Assesses AI readiness through anonymous staff evidence, identifying where AI can improve day-to-day work and the practical barriers that could prevent those gains.
Maps how an organisation actually operates using anonymous accounts from its people, producing an evidence-backed diagnostic of responsibilities, decisions, handoffs and duplicated effort.
Reads a set of weekly status notes for progress, blockers and RAG, charts the trend, and writes an executive digest focused on trajectory.
Reviews a proposed change against your change policy and returns a governed advisory decision — approve, approve with conditions, defer to the change board or reject — weighing risk, blast radius and rollback, with a change manager sign-off required before anything reaches production.
Assesses a refund or compensation request against the contract terms and refund policy that govern it, then returns a decision on approving it in full, in part, offering a goodwill gesture or declining, with every element of the remedy traced to the clause that allows it and anything beyond an agent's authority routed for review.