Gap Analysis
Aggregate findings across all assessments for "$ARGUMENTS" into a prioritized gap register. Deduplicate gaps that appear across multiple regulations and score by risk, effort, and regulatory urgency.
Prerequisites
Read .metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/00-scope.md. If this file does not exist, tell the user:
Phase 0 (Scope) has not been completed for "$ARGUMENTS". Run /compliance:regulatory-landscape $ARGUMENTS first, or use --skip-checks to bypass.
If --skip-checks is present in $ARGUMENTS, skip this check.
Process
Read context files:
- Read
plugins/compliance/shared/grc-lifecycle-guide.md for GRC methodology reference
- Read
.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/00-scope.md for scope and control framework context
- Read all assessment files from
.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/01-assess/ directory
Aggregate findings:
- Extract all non-compliant and partially-compliant findings from each assessment
- Normalize finding descriptions for consistent comparison
- Identify common root causes across findings
Deduplicate gaps:
- Identify the same gap appearing across multiple regulation assessments
- Merge duplicates into a single gap entry listing all affected regulations
- Preserve regulation-specific nuances in the merged entry
Score each gap:
- Risk score (1-10): What happens if not addressed? Consider regulatory penalties, data breach exposure, business disruption, reputational damage
- Effort score (1-10): Implementation complexity — technical difficulty, organizational change required, third-party dependencies, timeline
- Regulatory urgency (1-10): Deadline proximity, active enforcement, customer-blocking potential
Prioritize and categorize:
- Calculate weighted priority score (risk 40%, urgency 35%, inverse effort 25%)
- Identify quick wins — low effort, high risk reduction
- Identify critical gaps — high risk regardless of effort
- Identify strategic improvements — high effort but significant long-term value
Write the artifact to .metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/02-remediate.md with sections:
- Gap Register — table with gap ID, description, affected regulations, risk score, effort score, urgency score, weighted priority
- Quick Wins — gaps that can be closed rapidly with high impact
- Critical Gaps — highest risk items requiring immediate attention
- Root Cause Analysis — common themes across gaps
- Cross-Regulation Impact — gaps that affect the most regulations
Output
The gap analysis written to .metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/02-remediate.md. Present a summary to the user highlighting:
- Total number of unique gaps identified
- Number of quick wins
- Top 5 highest-priority gaps
- Cross-regulation coverage opportunities
1---2name: gap-analysis3description: Aggregate findings across all assessments into a prioritized gap register4---56# Gap Analysis78Aggregate findings across all assessments for "$ARGUMENTS" into a prioritized gap register. Deduplicate gaps that appear across multiple regulations and score by risk, effort, and regulatory urgency.910## Prerequisites1112Read `.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/00-scope.md`. If this file does not exist, tell the user:1314> Phase 0 (Scope) has not been completed for "$ARGUMENTS". Run `/compliance:regulatory-landscape $ARGUMENTS` first, or use `--skip-checks` to bypass.1516If `--skip-checks` is present in $ARGUMENTS, skip this check.1718## Process19201. **Read context files:**21 - Read `plugins/compliance/shared/grc-lifecycle-guide.md` for GRC methodology reference22 - Read `.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/00-scope.md` for scope and control framework context23 - Read all assessment files from `.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/01-assess/` directory24252. **Aggregate findings:**26 - Extract all non-compliant and partially-compliant findings from each assessment27 - Normalize finding descriptions for consistent comparison28 - Identify common root causes across findings29303. **Deduplicate gaps:**31 - Identify the same gap appearing across multiple regulation assessments32 - Merge duplicates into a single gap entry listing all affected regulations33 - Preserve regulation-specific nuances in the merged entry34354. **Score each gap:**36 - **Risk score (1-10):** What happens if not addressed? Consider regulatory penalties, data breach exposure, business disruption, reputational damage37 - **Effort score (1-10):** Implementation complexity — technical difficulty, organizational change required, third-party dependencies, timeline38 - **Regulatory urgency (1-10):** Deadline proximity, active enforcement, customer-blocking potential39405. **Prioritize and categorize:**41 - Calculate weighted priority score (risk 40%, urgency 35%, inverse effort 25%)42 - Identify quick wins — low effort, high risk reduction43 - Identify critical gaps — high risk regardless of effort44 - Identify strategic improvements — high effort but significant long-term value45466. **Write the artifact** to `.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/02-remediate.md` with sections:47 - **Gap Register** — table with gap ID, description, affected regulations, risk score, effort score, urgency score, weighted priority48 - **Quick Wins** — gaps that can be closed rapidly with high impact49 - **Critical Gaps** — highest risk items requiring immediate attention50 - **Root Cause Analysis** — common themes across gaps51 - **Cross-Regulation Impact** — gaps that affect the most regulations5253## Output5455The gap analysis written to `.metapowers/compliance/$ARGUMENTS/02-remediate.md`. Present a summary to the user highlighting:56- Total number of unique gaps identified57- Number of quick wins58- Top 5 highest-priority gaps59- Cross-regulation coverage opportunities