Generate SOX sample selections, testing workpapers, and control assessments. Use when planning quarterly or annual SOX 404 testing, pulling a sample for a control (revenue, P2P, ITGC, close), building a testing workpaper template, or evaluating and classifying a control deficiency.
npx skills add https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill sox-testing
> If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Important: This command assists with SOX compliance workflows but does not provide audit or legal advice. All testing workpapers and assessments should be reviewed by qualified financial professionals before use in audit documentation.
Generate sample selections, create testing workpapers, document control assessments, and provide testing templates for SOX 404 internal controls over financial reporting.
/sox <control-area> <period>
control-area — The control area to test:revenue-recognition — Revenue cycle controls (order-to-cash)procure-to-pay or p2p — Procurement and AP controls (purchase-to-pay)payroll — Payroll processing and compensation controlsfinancial-close — Period-end close and reporting controlstreasury — Cash management and treasury controlsfixed-assets — Capital asset lifecycle controlsinventory — Inventory valuation and management controlsitgc — IT general controls (access, change management, operations)entity-level — Entity-level and monitoring controlsjournal-entries — Journal entry processing controlsperiod — The testing period (e.g., 2024-Q4, 2024, 2024-H2)Based on the control area, identify the key controls. Present the control matrix:
| Control # | Control Description | Type | Frequency | Key/Non-Key | Risk | Assertion |
|-----------|-------------------|------|-----------|-------------|------|-----------|
| [ID] | [Description] | Manual/Automated/IT-Dependent | Daily/Weekly/Monthly/Quarterly/Annual | Key | High/Medium/Low | [CEAVOP] |
Control types:
Assertions (CEAVOP):
Calculate sample sizes based on control frequency and risk:
| Control Frequency | Population Size (approx.) | Recommended Sample |
|------------------|--------------------------|-------------------|
| Annual | 1 | 1 (test the instance) |
| Quarterly | 4 | 2 |
| Monthly | 12 | 2-4 (based on risk) |
| Weekly | 52 | 5-15 (based on risk) |
| Daily | ~250 | 20-40 (based on risk) |
| Per-transaction | Varies | 25-60 (based on risk and volume) |
Adjust for:
Select samples from the population using the appropriate method:
Random selection (default for transaction-level controls):
Systematic selection (for periodic controls):
Targeted selection (supplement to random, for risk-based testing):
Present the sample:
SAMPLE SELECTION
Control: [Control ID] — [Description]
Period: [Testing period]
Population: [Count] items, $[Total value]
Sample size: [N] items
Selection method: [Random/Systematic/Targeted]
| Sample # | Transaction Date | Reference/ID | Amount | Selection Basis |
|----------|-----------------|--------------|--------|-----------------|
| 1 | [Date] | [Ref] | $X,XXX | Random |
| 2 | [Date] | [Ref] | $X,XXX | Random |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
Generate a testing template for each control:
SOX CONTROL TESTING WORKPAPER
==============================
Control #: [ID]
Control Description: [Full description of the control activity]
Control Owner: [Role/title — to be filled by tester]
Control Type: [Manual/Automated/IT-Dependent Manual]
Frequency: [How often the control operates]
Key Control: [Yes/No]
Relevant Assertion(s): [CEAVOP]
Testing Period: [Period]
TEST OBJECTIVE:
To determine whether [control description] operated effectively throughout the testing period.
TEST PROCEDURES:
1. [Step 1 — What to inspect, examine, or re-perform]
2. [Step 2 — What evidence to obtain]
3. [Step 3 — What to compare or verify]
4. [Step 4 — How to evaluate completeness of performance]
5. [Step 5 — How to assess timeliness of performance]
EXPECTED EVIDENCE:
- [Document type 1 — e.g., signed approval form]
- [Document type 2 — e.g., system screenshot showing review]
- [Document type 3 — e.g., reconciliation with preparer sign-off]
TEST RESULTS:
| Sample # | Ref | Procedure 1 | Procedure 2 | Procedure 3 | Result | Exception? | Notes |
|----------|-----|-------------|-------------|-------------|--------|------------|-------|
| 1 | | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Y/N | |
| 2 | | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Pass/Fail | Y/N | |
EXCEPTIONS NOTED:
| Sample # | Exception Description | Root Cause | Compensating Control | Impact |
|----------|----------------------|------------|---------------------|--------|
| | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
[ ] Effective — Control operated effectively with no exceptions
[ ] Effective with exceptions — Control operated effectively; exceptions are isolated
[ ] Deficiency — Control did not operate effectively
[ ] Significant Deficiency — Deficiency is more than inconsequential
[ ] Material Weakness — Reasonable possibility of material misstatement not prevented/detected
Tested by: ________________ Date: ________
Reviewed by: _______________ Date: ________
Based on the control area, provide pre-built test step templates:
Revenue Recognition:
Procure to Pay:
Financial Close:
ITGC:
Classify any identified deficiencies:
Deficiency: A control does not allow management or employees to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. Consider:
Significant Deficiency: A deficiency (or combination) that is less severe than a material weakness but important enough to merit attention by those responsible for oversight.
Material Weakness: A deficiency (or combination) such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
Provide:
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always
Expert guidance for systematic backtesting of trading strategies. Use when developing, testing, stress-testing, or validating quantitative trading strategies. Covers "beating ideas to death" methodology, parameter robustness testing, slippage modeling, bias prevention, and interpreting backtest results. Applicable when user asks about backtesting, strategy validation, robustness testing, avoiding overfitting, or systematic trading development.
Cloud laboratory platform for automated protein testing and validation. Use when designing proteins and needing experimental validation including binding assays, expression testing, thermostability measurements, enzyme activity assays, or protein sequence optimization. Also use for submitting experiments via API, tracking experiment status, downloading results, optimizing protein sequences for better expression using computational tools (NetSolP, SoluProt, SolubleMPNN, ESM), or managing protein design workflows with wet-lab validation.
This skill should be used for time series machine learning tasks including classification, regression, clustering, forecasting, anomaly detection, segmentation, and similarity search. Use when working with temporal data, sequential patterns, or time-indexed observations requiring specialized algorithms beyond standard ML approaches. Particularly suited for univariate and multivariate time series analysis with scikit-learn compatible APIs.
Automated LLM-driven hypothesis generation and testing on tabular datasets. Use when you want to systematically explore hypotheses about patterns in empirical data (e.g., deception detection, content analysis). Combines literature insights with data-driven hypothesis testing. For manual hypothesis formulation use hypothesis-generation; for creative ideation use scientific-brainstorming.
Take anthropics/sox-testing from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.