返回技能列表

conduct-gxp-audit

pjt222
更新于 2 days ago
7 次查看
17
2
17
在 GitHub 上查看
data

关于

This Claude Skill automates GxP compliance audits for computerized systems, handling the full audit lifecycle from planning to follow-up. It classifies findings, generates CAPAs, and creates reports for internal, supplier, or for-cause audits. Developers can use it for pre-inspection readiness and compliance reviews of validated systems.

快速安装

Claude Code

推荐
主要方式
npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code
插件命令备选方式
/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
Git 克隆备选方式
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/conduct-gxp-audit

在 Claude Code 中复制并粘贴此命令以安装该技能

技能文档

Conduct GxP Audit

Plan + execute GxP audit of computerized systems, data integrity practices, or regulated procs.

Use When

  • Scheduled internal audit of validated computerized system
  • Supplier/vendor qualification audit for GxP-relevant software
  • Pre-inspection readiness assessment before regulatory audit
  • For-cause audit triggered by deviation, complaint, or data integrity concern
  • Periodic review of validated system's compliance posture

In

  • Required: Audit scope (system, proc, or site to audit)
  • Required: Applicable regs (21 CFR Part 11, EU Annex 11, GMP, GLP, GCP)
  • Required: Prev audit reports + open CAPA items
  • Optional: System valid. docs (URS, VP, IQ/OQ/PQ, traceability matrix)
  • Optional: SOPs, training records, change control logs
  • Optional: Specific risk areas / concerns triggering audit

Do

Step 1: Develop Audit Plan

# Audit Plan
## Document ID: AP-[SYS]-[YYYY]-[NNN]

### 1. Objective
[State the purpose: scheduled, for-cause, supplier qualification, pre-inspection]

### 2. Scope
- **System/Process**: [Name and version]
- **Regulations**: [21 CFR Part 11, EU Annex 11, ICH Q7, etc.]
- **Period**: [Date range of records under review]
- **Exclusions**: [Any areas explicitly out of scope]

### 3. Audit Criteria
| Area | Regulatory Reference | Key Requirements |
|------|---------------------|------------------|
| Electronic records | 21 CFR 11.10 | Controls for closed systems |
| Audit trail | 21 CFR 11.10(e) | Secure, computer-generated, time-stamped |
| Electronic signatures | 21 CFR 11.50 | Manifestation, legally binding |
| Access controls | EU Annex 11, §12 | Role-based, documented |
| Data integrity | MHRA guidance | ALCOA+ principles |
| Change control | ICH Q10 | Documented, assessed, approved |

### 4. Schedule
| Date | Time | Activity | Participants |
|------|------|----------|-------------|
| Day 1 AM | 09:00 | Opening meeting | All |
| Day 1 AM | 10:00 | Document review | Auditor + QA |
| Day 1 PM | 13:00 | System walkthrough | Auditor + IT + System Owner |
| Day 2 AM | 09:00 | Interviews + evidence collection | Auditor + Users |
| Day 2 PM | 14:00 | Finding consolidation | Auditor |
| Day 2 PM | 16:00 | Closing meeting | All |

### 5. Audit Team
| Role | Name | Responsibility |
|------|------|---------------|
| Lead Auditor | [Name] | Plan, execute, report |
| Subject Matter Expert | [Name] | Technical assessment |
| Auditee Representative | [Name] | Facilitate access and information |

Audit plan approved by QA mgmt + communicated to auditee ≥ 2 weeks before audit. If err: Reschedule if auditee can't provide req'd docs or personnel.

Step 2: Conduct Opening Meeting

Agenda:

  1. Introduce audit team + roles
  2. Confirm scope, schedule, logistics
  3. Explain finding classification (critical/major/minor)
  4. Confirm confidentiality
  5. ID auditee escorts + doc custodians
  6. Address questions

Opening meeting doc'd w/ attendance record. If err: Key personnel unavail → reschedule affected audit activities.

Step 3: Collect + Review Evidence

Review docs + records vs. audit criteria:

3a. Validation Documentation Review

  • URS exists + approved
  • Valid. plan matches system category + risk
  • IQ/OQ/PQ protocols executed w/ results doc'd
  • Traceability matrix links req's to test results
  • Deviations doc'd + resolved
  • Valid. summary report approved

3b. Operational Controls Review

  • SOPs current + approved
  • Training records show competence all users
  • Change control records complete (req, assessment, approval, valid.)
  • Incident/deviation reports handled per SOP
  • Periodic review conducted on schedule

3c. Data Integrity Assessment

  • Audit trail enabled + not user-modifiable
  • Electronic sigs meet reg req's
  • Backup + recovery docs'd + tested
  • Access controls enforce role-based perms
  • Data: attributable, legible, contemporaneous, original, accurate (ALCOA+)

3d. System Configuration Review

  • Prod config matches validated state
  • User accounts reviewed — no shared accounts, inactive disabled
  • System clocks sync'd + accurate
  • Security patches applied per approved change control

Evidence collected as screenshots, doc copies, interview notes w/ timestamps. If err: Can't verify → record "unable to verify" as observation + reason.

Step 4: Classify Findings

Classify each finding by severity:

ClassificationDefinitionResponse Required
CriticalDirect impact on product quality, patient safety, or data integrity. Systematic failure of a key control.Immediate containment + CAPA within 15 business days
MajorSignificant departure from GxP requirements. Potential to impact data integrity if uncorrected.CAPA within 30 business days
MinorIsolated deviation from procedure. No direct impact on data integrity or product quality.Correction within 60 business days
ObservationOpportunity for improvement. Not a regulatory requirement.Optional — tracked for trend analysis

Doc each finding:

## Finding F-[NNN]
**Classification:** [Critical / Major / Minor / Observation]
**Area:** [Audit trail / Access control / Change control / etc.]
**Reference:** [Regulatory clause, e.g., 21 CFR 11.10(e)]

**Observation:**
[Objective description of what was found]

**Evidence:**
[Document ID, screenshot reference, interview notes]

**Regulatory Expectation:**
[What the regulation requires]

**Risk:**
[Impact on data integrity, product quality, or patient safety]

Every finding has classification, evidence, reg ref. If err: Classification disputed → escalate to audit program manager for adjudication.

Step 5: Conduct Closing Meeting

Agenda:

  1. Present findings summary (no new findings should be raised)
  2. Review finding classifications
  3. Discuss prelim CAPA expectations + timelines
  4. Confirm next steps + report timeline
  5. Acknowledge auditee cooperation

Closing meeting doc'd w/ attendance. Auditee acknowledges findings (acknowledgement ≠ agreement). If err: Auditee disputes finding → doc disagreement + escalate per SOP.

Step 6: Write Audit Report

# Audit Report
## Document ID: AR-[SYS]-[YYYY]-[NNN]

### 1. Executive Summary
An audit of [System/Process] was conducted on [dates] against [regulations].
[N] findings were identified: [n] critical, [n] major, [n] minor, [n] observations.

### 2. Scope and Methodology
[Summarize audit plan scope, criteria, and methods used]

### 3. Findings Summary
| Finding ID | Classification | Area | Brief Description |
|-----------|---------------|------|-------------------|
| F-001 | Major | Audit trail | Audit trail disabled for batch record module |
| F-002 | Minor | Training | Two users missing annual GxP training |
| F-003 | Observation | Documentation | SOP formatting inconsistencies |

### 4. Detailed Findings
[Include full finding details from Step 4 for each finding]

### 5. Positive Observations
[Document areas of good practice observed during the audit]

### 6. Conclusion
The overall compliance status is assessed as [Satisfactory / Needs Improvement / Unsatisfactory].

### 7. Distribution
| Recipient | Role |
|-----------|------|
| [Name] | System Owner |
| [Name] | QA Director |
| [Name] | IT Manager |

### Approval
| Role | Name | Signature | Date |
|------|------|-----------|------|
| Lead Auditor | | | |
| QA Director | | | |

Report issued within 15 business days of closing meeting. If err: Delayed beyond 15 days → notify stakeholders + doc reason.

Step 7: Track CAPA + Verify Effectiveness

Each finding requiring CAPA:

## CAPA Tracking
| Finding ID | CAPA ID | Root Cause | Corrective Action | Due Date | Status | Effectiveness Check |
|-----------|---------|------------|-------------------|----------|--------|-------------------|
| F-001 | CAPA-2025-042 | Configuration oversight during upgrade | Enable audit trail, verify all modules | 2025-04-15 | Open | Scheduled 2025-07-15 |
| F-002 | CAPA-2025-043 | Training matrix not updated | Complete training, update tracking | 2025-05-01 | Open | Scheduled 2025-08-01 |

CAPAs assigned, tracked, effectiveness verified per defined timeline. If err: Unresolved CAPAs escalate to QA mgmt + flag in next audit cycle.

Check

  • Audit plan approved + communicated pre-audit
  • Opening + closing meetings doc'd w/ attendance
  • Evidence collected w/ timestamps + source refs
  • Every finding has classification, evidence, reg ref
  • Audit report issued within 15 business days
  • CAPAs assigned w/ due dates for all critical + major findings
  • Prev audit CAPAs verified for closure effectiveness

Traps

  • Scope creep: Expanding scope during exec w/o formal agreement → incomplete coverage + disputes.
  • Opinion-based findings: Findings must ref specific reg req's, not personal preferences.
  • Adversarial tone: Audits = collaborative quality improvement, not interrogations.
  • Ignore positives: Reporting only findings w/o acknowledging good practices undermines trust.
  • No effectiveness check: Closing CAPA w/o verifying fix actually works = recurring regulatory citation.

  • perform-csv-assessment — full CSV lifecycle assessment (URS through validation summary)
  • setup-gxp-r-project — project structure for validated R environments
  • implement-audit-trail — audit trail impl for electronic records
  • write-validation-documentation — IQ/OQ/PQ protocol + report writing
  • security-audit-codebase — security-focused code audit (complementary perspective)

GitHub 仓库

pjt222/agent-almanac
路径: i18n/caveman-ultra/skills/conduct-gxp-audit
0
agentsagentskillsai-assisted-developmentclaude-codeskillsteams

相关推荐技能

content-collections

Content Collections 是一个 TypeScript 优先的构建工具,可将本地 Markdown/MDX 文件转换为类型安全的数据集合。它专为构建博客、文档站和内容密集型 Vite+React 应用而设计,提供基于 Zod 的自动模式验证。该工具涵盖从 Vite 插件配置、MDX 编译到生产环境部署的完整工作流。

查看技能

polymarket

这个Claude Skill为开发者提供完整的Polymarket预测市场开发支持,涵盖API调用、交易执行和市场数据分析。关键特性包括实时WebSocket数据流,可监控实时交易、订单和市场动态。开发者可用它构建预测市场应用、实施交易策略并集成实时市场预测功能。

查看技能

creating-opencode-plugins

该Skill帮助开发者创建OpenCode插件,用于接入命令、文件、LSP等25+种事件。它提供了插件结构、事件API规范和JavaScript/TypeScript实现模式,适合需要拦截操作、扩展功能或自定义事件处理的场景。开发者可通过它快速构建响应式模块来增强OpenCode AI助手的能力。

查看技能

sglang

SGLang是一个专为LLM设计的高性能推理框架,特别适用于需要结构化输出的场景。它通过RadixAttention前缀缓存技术,在处理JSON、正则表达式、工具调用等具有重复前缀的复杂工作流时,能实现极速生成。如果你正在构建智能体或多轮对话系统,并追求远超vLLM的推理性能,SGLang是理想选择。

查看技能