agentleFS
Microsoft AzureKnown publisherAzure/git-ape/.github/community-skills/saas-assessment-report/SKILL.md

saas-assessment-report

Skill274 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub

Orchestrates a comprehensive SaaS platform assessment against WAF, CAF, CIS, NIST, PCI-DSS, HIPAA, SOC 2, FedRAMP, and SaaS maturity frameworks. Generates a print-ready HTML report (save as PDF from browser). Use when the user wants to assess a SaaS repo, generate a compliance report, or audit an Azure SaaS platform.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    All Azure services discovered in the repo (App Service, Cosmos DB, Storage, Key Vault, OpenAI, Front Door, etc.)

    line 75
  2. Very specific:

    If pandoc or headless Chrome is available, auto-convert:

    line 138

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

SaaS Assessment Report Skill

Purpose

Runs a full-spectrum assessment of a SaaS application repository and produces a single print-ready HTML report that can be saved as PDF. This skill orchestrates existing skills — it does not duplicate their logic.

When to Use

  • User asks to "assess", "audit", "review", or "score" a SaaS repo
  • User wants a compliance report (NIST, CIS, PCI, HIPAA, SOC 2, FedRAMP)
  • User wants a WAF/CAF assessment of their SaaS platform
  • User asks for a "readiness report" or "go-live checklist"

Workflow

Phase 1: Discovery (read-only)

Scan the repository to build an inventory:

  1. Infrastructure — Find IaC files (Bicep, ARM, Terraform) under infra/, .azure/, or root
  2. Application code — Identify language, framework, Dockerfile, package manifests
  3. Existing docs — Check for prior skill outputs in docs/ (tenant-isolation-model.md, security-and-compliance.md, scale-and-sre.md, etc.)
  4. CI/CD — Check .github/workflows/, azure-pipelines.yml, or similar
  5. Config — Environment variables, Key Vault references, connection strings

Phase 2: Run Assessments

Invoke each skill/agent and collect structured results. Use existing doc artifacts if they exist — don't re-run a skill if its output is already in the repo and still current.

#Skill / AgentAssessment AreaOutput Key
1azure-principal-architectWAF 5-pillar reviewwaf
2isv-landing-zone-foundationCAF landing zone alignmentcaf
3tenant-isolation-modelsIsolation model evaluationisolation
4multi-tenant_SaaSSaaS architecture maturitysaas_maturity
5security-and-complianceSecurity controls & threat modelsecurity
6scale-and-sreSRE readiness & observabilitysre
7tenant-lifecycle-automationLifecycle automationlifecycle
8fulfillment-and-meteringMarketplace billingbilling
9deployment-blueprintsDeployment topologytopology
10marketplace-onboardingMarketplace readinessmarketplace
11azure-security-analyzerPer-resource IaC securityiac_security
12azure-policy-advisorAzure Policy compliancepolicy
13azure-complianceCIS/NIST/FedRAMP controlscompliance
14azure-cost-estimatorCost estimatecost

Phase 3: Score & Classify

Score each area 1–5 using evidence from the repo. Classify every finding:

SeverityMeaningTimeline
🔴 CriticalBlocks production, unacceptable riskFix before deploy
🟠 HighShould fix before GA30 days
🟡 MediumAddress post-launch60–90 days
🟢 LowNice-to-have improvementBacklog

Phase 3.5: Generate Recommended Architecture Diagram

Based on assessment findings, generate a recommended reference architecture diagram (Mermaid) reflecting current state plus remediation recommendations.

Inputs: IaC templates, app code structure, existing docs (tenant-isolation-model.md, deployment-blueprints.md, security-and-compliance.md), discovered Azure services.

Diagram must include:

  • All Azure services discovered in the repo (App Service, Cosmos DB, Storage, Key Vault, OpenAI, Front Door, etc.)
  • Multi-tenant architecture boundaries (shared compute, isolated data)
  • Network topology (VNet, subnets, private endpoints, Front Door/WAF)
  • Identity and access flow (Entra ID B2C, managed identities, RBAC)
  • Data flow direction arrows (ingestion → processing → storage → output)
  • Observability stack (App Insights, Log Analytics)
  • SaaS control plane vs. data plane separation
  • Marketplace integration points (landing page, webhook, fulfillment API)

Annotate with assessment findings:

  • 🟢 Components that passed assessment checks
  • 🟡 Components with gaps (show what's missing)
  • 🔴 Components with critical issues (highlight remediation needed)

Skills to invoke:

  • azure-resource-visualizer — if live Azure resources exist, generate from deployed state
  • deployment-blueprints — match to closest SaaS reference topology phase
  • azure-principal-architect — WAF-aligned review of the architecture

Output: Mermaid diagram embedded in the report + saved as standalone file at .azure/assessments/architecture-diagram-YYYY-MM-DD.md.

Phase 4: Generate Report

Build a self-contained HTML file using the web-artifacts-builder Clawpilot theme. The HTML must include @media print styles for clean PDF output.

Report Sections

  1. Cover Page — Repo name, assessment date, assessor, overall score
  2. Executive Summary — Composite score (1–100), top 5 critical gaps, top 5 strengths, 30/60/90 day priorities
  3. WAF Scorecard — Radar chart + per-pillar detail
  4. CAF Compliance — Naming, landing zone, governance, identity baseline
  5. Recommended Architecture Diagram — Mermaid diagram showing current Azure services, multi-tenant boundaries, network topology, identity flow, data flow, and SaaS control/data plane separation. Annotated with assessment findings (🟢/🟡/🔴).
  6. SaaS Maturity — Isolation, lifecycle, billing, marketplace, topology
  7. Regulatory Compliance Matrix — Cross-framework table:
| Control ID | Description | NIST | CIS | PCI | HIPAA | SOC2 | FedRAMP | Status | Evidence |
  1. Security Deep-Dive — Controls matrix, threat model summary, isolation test coverage
  2. SRE Readiness — SLO/SLI, observability, autoscaling, DR, noisy-neighbor
  3. Cost Analysis — Per-resource estimate, optimization recommendations
  4. Action Plan — 30/60/90 day roadmap with owners and effort (S/M/L)
  5. Appendix — Full findings list, file references, methodology notes

Regulatory Frameworks to Map

FrameworkFocusKey Controls
CIS Azure Foundations v2.1Azure-specific hardeningIAM, networking, storage, database, logging, VM
NIST 800-53 Rev 5 (Moderate)Federal baselineAC, AU, CM, IA, IR, SC, SI families
PCI DSS v4.0Payment card dataCDE scope, encryption, access, logging, pen testing
HIPAA / HITRUSTHealth data (PHI)Encryption, access controls, BAA, breach notification
SOC 2 Type IITrust servicesSecurity, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, privacy
FedRAMP (Moderate)Government cloudFIPS 140-2, continuous monitoring, POA&M
ISO 27001:2022InfoSec managementAnnex A controls (organizational, people, physical, technological)
Azure Well-ArchitectedCloud architectureSecurity, reliability, performance, cost, ops
Azure CAFCloud adoptionNaming, governance, landing zones, identity

Phase 5: Save & Convert

  1. Save HTML to .azure/assessments/saas-assessment-YYYY-MM-DD.html
  2. Tell user: Open the HTML in a browser → Print → Save as PDF
  3. If pandoc or headless Chrome is available, auto-convert:
    # Option A: Chrome headless (best fidelity)
    chrome --headless --print-to-pdf=report.pdf --no-margins report.html
    
    # Option B: Edge headless
    msedge --headless --print-to-pdf=report.pdf --no-margins report.html
    
    # Option C: pandoc (simpler, less styling)
    pandoc report.html -o report.pdf --pdf-engine=wkhtmltopdf

Print-Optimized CSS Requirements

The HTML report MUST include these print styles:

@media print {
  body { font-size: 11pt; color: #000; background: #fff; }
  .no-print { display: none; }
  h1, h2, h3 { page-break-after: avoid; }
  table, figure, .card { page-break-inside: avoid; }
  .page-break { page-break-before: always; }
  @page { margin: 0.75in; size: letter; }
  @page :first { margin-top: 0; } /* Cover page */
}

Scoring Methodology

Per-Framework Score (1–5)

ScoreMeaning
1Not addressed — no evidence in repo
2Minimal — some awareness, major gaps
3Partial — key controls present, gaps remain
4Strong — most controls in place, minor improvements needed
5Exemplary — comprehensive implementation, tested

Composite Score (1–100)

Weighted average across all frameworks:

CategoryWeightComponents
WAF25%Average of 5 pillar scores × 4
CAF10%Naming + landing zone + governance
SaaS Maturity20%Isolation + lifecycle + billing + marketplace
Regulatory25%Average of applicable framework scores × 4
SRE10%SLO + observability + scaling + DR
Cost10%Right-sizing + optimization

Example Invocation

@git-ape /saas-assessment-report current
@git-ape /saas-assessment-report https://github.com/org/saas-app
@git-ape /saas-assessment-report . --frameworks waf,nist,cis,pci

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.