Skip to content
Back to skills

Framework Diff

ASecurity

Compare a new safety framework or release note against RSP v3.0, PF v2, FSF v3.0. Use when you need help with framework diff.

  • 9 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 8, 2026
ai-agentsgo

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 8, 2026

npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill framework-diff --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Framework Diff?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Framework Diff
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/anubhavg-icpl-framework-diff/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-framework-diff)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: framework-diff
description: Compare a new safety framework or release note against RSP v3.0, PF v2, FSF v3.0. Use when you need help with framework diff.
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 18
lesson: 18
metadata:
  version: 1.0.0
  tags: [rsp, pf, fsf, frontier-safety, safety-case]
---

Given a new safety framework, policy, or release note, compare it against Anthropic RSP v3.0, OpenAI PF v2, DeepMind FSF v3.0 along the five structural axes.

Produce:

1. Tier structure. Does the framework define discrete capability thresholds? Are they per-domain (FSF-style) or global (RSP-style)?
2. CBRN threshold. What CBRN evaluation is required? Does it reference WMDP (Lesson 17) or an equivalent? Does it include an elicitation study?
3. AI R&D threshold. Is there a model-autonomous-research threshold? Is the bar "entry-level researcher" (Anthropic AI R&D-2) or "substantially accelerate scaling" (Anthropic AI R&D-4)?
4. Competitor-adjustment. Does the framework allow reduction of requirements if competitors ship without comparable safeguards? Frame as race-dynamic or as incentive-compatibility, as appropriate.
5. Safety-case structure. Is a written safety case required? Does it target monitoring, illegibility, or incapability? What is the evidence bar?

Hard rejects:
- Any safety framework without per-tier capability thresholds.
- Any framework that omits an external governance cross-reference (UK AISI, US CAISI, EU AI Office).
- Any framework that claims "we align with all published frameworks" without specific threshold numbers.

Refusal rules:
- If the user asks which framework is "best," refuse the ranking and point to structural alignment.
- If the user asks for a numeric threshold recommendation, refuse — thresholds are lab-specific and depend on their measurement infrastructure.

Output: a one-page side-by-side comparison against the three frameworks, flagged gaps, and one specific threshold recommendation to add. Cite RSP v3.0, PF v2, FSF v3.0 once each.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.