Menu
33 platforms · Last updated
AI compliance software: what each platform's AI agents do
AI compliance software is a compliance or GRC platform with built-in AI agents. We checked 33 platforms against each vendor's documentation. Their most common jobs are security questionnaires (20) and evidence collection (18). Eleven say a person approves output from every agent, among them Carbide, CISO Assistant and Hyperproof; 13 say so for some agents.
Looking for something else? To govern your own AI product, see ISO 42001 software for AI startups. To certify your own AI agent, see AIUC-1 certification. To connect your own assistant to a compliance platform, see compliance MCP servers compared.
Every compliance platform we have checked, listed alphabetically. Payment plays no part in who is listed or in what order.
What each compliance platform's AI agents do
One row per platform we have checked, from each vendor's own documentation. Tasks combine those of every agent the platform documents. Beta, limited and add-on agents are labelled; announced agents are named but not counted. Not documented means the vendor does not say, not that the feature is missing. Not established means we found no public documentation of an MCP server.
| AI agents | Tasks covered | Person approves output | Your data and models | Official MCP server | Checked | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anecdotes Vendor source | ChatGRC; Agent Studio | Control mapping, vendor risk, remediation, audit preparation, monitoring | Not documented | Vendor says not used to train models; models: Google Vertex AI | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Apptega Vendor source | Assessment Completion Agent; Security Questionnaire Automation; ApptegaGPT (in-app virtual CISO) | Security questionnaires, control mapping, remediation, audit preparation | Required for some agents | Not documented | Not established | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Carbide Vendor source | Carbide Analyst | Policy drafting, control mapping, risk assessment, audit preparation | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: OpenAI | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| CISO Assistant Vendor source | AI chat assistant (chat mode) | Evidence collection, control mapping, risk assessment, remediation | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: Customer's choice | Official | 13 Oct 2026 |
| Comp AI Vendor source | Security questionnaire answering; AI Policy Editor; AI-assisted penetration tests | Security questionnaires, policy drafting, monitoring | Required for some agents | Vendor says not used to train models; models: Anthropic, OpenAI | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| ComplyJet Vendor source | AI policy drafting (Auto Generate Policies); AI security questionnaire answers (limited availability); ComplyJet AI Agent | Security questionnaires, policy drafting, remediation | Required for some agents | Not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Conveyor Vendor source | ConveyorAI; Trust Center Agent; Triage (intake) automation | Security questionnaires | Not documented | Vendor says not used by default; documents exceptions; models: OpenAI, Anthropic, Google | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Delve Vendor source | Delve AI agents (computer-use evidence agent, AI evidence pathway builder) | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, monitoring | Not documented | Not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Drata Vendor source | Agentic TPRM Assessment; Agentic Questionnaire Response (beta); AI Questionnaire Assistance; AI Trust Center Setup; AI Agent Governance (limited availability); Drata AI (policy-to-control mapping, AI-built tests, policy change summaries) | Security questionnaires, policy drafting, control mapping, vendor risk, audit preparation, AI governance | Required for some agents | Vendor says not used by default; documents exceptions; models: OpenAI (questionnaire answering) | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Hyperproof Vendor source | Hyperproof AI (assistant, evidence collection and validation agents) (limited availability) | Evidence collection, remediation, audit preparation, monitoring | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: Microsoft Azure OpenAI | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Iru Vendor source | Iru AI (Compliance, Trust Center, Actions and other agents); Adaptive Compliance (Iru AI) | Security questionnaires, control mapping, remediation, monitoring | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| ISMS.online Vendor source | No AI agent documented | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 13 Oct 2026 |
| LogicGate Vendor source | GRC Agents (add-on); Insights Agent (beta) | Vendor risk, risk assessment, monitoring | Required for some agents | Vendor says not used to train models; models: OpenAI | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Oneleet Vendor source | Fieldwork AI agents; Oneleet AI evidence review (limited availability); Autofix | Evidence collection, remediation, audit preparation | Required for some agents | Not documented | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| OneTrust Certification Automation Vendor source | OneTrust CORIE (limited availability); AI-driven assessments (conversational assessment agents) (limited availability) | Security questionnaires, control mapping, vendor risk, monitoring | Required for some agents | Not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Onspring Vendor source | Onspring AI (agentic phase) (add-on) | Policy drafting, vendor risk, audit preparation, monitoring | Not documented | Not documented; models: Anthropic | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Optro Vendor source | Optro AI | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, control mapping, vendor risk, audit preparation | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: Microsoft Azure OpenAI, In-house ML models | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| RealCISO Vendor source | Cleo (AI reasoning engine / AI agent) | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, control mapping, remediation, audit preparation | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| SafeBase by Drata Vendor source | Agentic TPRM Assessment (Drata AI in SafeBase risk); AI Questionnaire Assistance | Security questionnaires, vendor risk | Required | Not documented | Official, early access | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Screenata Vendor source | Vera (AI compliance officer); Scheduled agents (Cloud Security, Repository, Code Scanner, Evidence, Controls) | Evidence collection, policy drafting, remediation, monitoring | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: OpenAI, Anthropic, Fireworks AI, Google (Gemini) | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Scrut Automation Vendor source | Scrut Teammates | Security questionnaires, vendor risk, remediation, monitoring | Not documented | Vendor says not used to train models; models not documented | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Scytale Vendor source | Scy (AI GRC agent); AI Third-Party Risk Management (Vendors module) | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, policy drafting, vendor risk, remediation, monitoring | Required for some agents | Not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Secureframe Vendor source | Comply AI for Remediation; Comply AI for Risk; Comply AI for Third Party Risk Management (vendor risk automated review) (add-on); Trust AI for Questionnaire Automation (AI auto-answer); AI Evidence Validation; Comply AI for Policies (policy writing assistant) | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, policy drafting, vendor risk, risk assessment, remediation | Required for some agents | Not documented; models: OpenAI | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management Vendor source | Risk Identification Agent (ServiceNow Otto for IRM, formerly Now Assist for IRM); Issue Submission Agent (Otto for IRM); GRC issue resolution agentic workflow (Otto for IRM); Regulatory Alert Analysis and Action Plan Generator (Otto for IRM); Control Objective Change Management Agent (Otto for IRM); AI Response Assist (Smart Assessment Engine, Otto for IRM and BCM) | Security questionnaires, control mapping, risk assessment, remediation | Required for some agents | Vendor says used unless you opt out; models: ServiceNow Now LLM, Azure OpenAI, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| SimpleRisk Vendor source | Chat Assistant (AI chat sidebar) (add-on); AI risk analysis (Risk Recommendations and FAIR Quantitative Analysis) (add-on); AI document creation and Document Customization (add-on); Document ↔ Control Matching (add-on); Control Test Generation (add-on) | Evidence collection, policy drafting, control mapping, risk assessment, remediation, audit preparation | Required | Not documented; models: Customer's choice | Official | 13 Oct 2026 |
| Sprinto Vendor source | Sprinto AI: AI Playground custom agents and Ask AI (beta); Fix-It Agent; Playbooks and Agent Mode; Security questionnaire AI; Autonomous Trust Platform | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, policy drafting, vendor risk, remediation, audit preparation, monitoring | Required for some agents | Vendor says not used to train models; models: OpenAI, Anthropic | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Strike Graph Vendor source | AI Security Assistant; Verify AI | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, control mapping, remediation, audit preparation, monitoring | Not documented | Vendor says not used to train models; models: self-hosted (vendor-operated models) | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Thoropass Vendor source | First Pass AI; Smart Sort AI; Audit Copilot and Audit Agents; Thoropass AI due diligence questionnaires | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, control mapping, audit preparation | Required for some agents | Not documented | Official | 12 Oct 2026 |
| TrustCloud Vendor source | TrustLens TPRM AI agent (agentic third-party assessments); Assurance AI (agents across first, second and third lines); GraphAI security questionnaire assistant | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, control mapping, vendor risk, monitoring | Required | Not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Trustero Vendor source | Trustero AI (multi-agent GRC system) | Evidence collection, control mapping, vendor risk, monitoring | Not documented | Vendor says not used to train models; models not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Vanta Vendor source | Vanta AI Agent (Vanta Agent); Vanta AI Agent 2.0 / Agentic Trust Platform (announced); Compliance Agent; Agent for Risk; Custom agents (scheduled and event-triggered) (beta); AI Governance from Vanta (limited availability) | Evidence collection, policy drafting, control mapping, remediation, audit preparation, monitoring, AI governance | Required for some agents | Vendor says not used to train models; models: OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, Self-hosted models | Official, public preview (its docs say beta) | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Whistic Vendor source | Automation Orchestrator (Initiator, Collector, Analyst, Reporter); Whistic Compliance Browser Agent (add-on) | Evidence collection, vendor risk, monitoring | Required | Vendor says not used to train models; models: Anthropic, Cohere, Amazon | Official, beta | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Zania Vendor source | Zania AI agents | Security questionnaires, evidence collection, vendor risk, remediation, monitoring | Not documented | Vendor says not used to train models; models not documented | No official server for compliance data documented | 12 Oct 2026 |
From vendor documentation, help centres, product pages and release notes on the date in the Checked column. We describe what each vendor documents; we have not tested these agents.
What is the best AI compliance software?
No platform is best for everyone. The right one depends on which tasks you want an agent to take on and how much control you need over what it produces. Compare four things the table shows: whether an agent covers the work that takes your team the most time, usually security questionnaires and evidence collection; whether a person must approve its output before it reaches a customer or changes a record; whether the vendor says your data is not used to train models; and, if you also use your own assistant, whether there is an official MCP server.
Nine platforms document agents for both security questionnaires and evidence collection: Optro, RealCISO, Scytale, Secureframe, Sprinto, Strike Graph, Thoropass, TrustCloud and Zania. Of those, Optro, RealCISO and TrustCloud say a person approves output from every agent. Ask each vendor you shortlist for a demo on your own data.
Which compliance tasks do the platforms' AI agents handle?
The most common task is security questionnaires: 20 of the 33 platforms document an agent for it. Next come evidence collection (18), remediation (18), monitoring (18), control mapping (16), vendor risk (15), audit preparation (14), policy drafting (11), risk assessment (6) and AI governance (2).
A task in the table means the vendor documents an available agent that does it, not how well the agent does it. Announced agents that are not available yet are named but not counted. One platform's single assistant can cover what another splits across several named agents, so compare the tasks rather than the number of agents.
Does a person approve what the agents produce?
Of the 32 platforms that document an AI agent, 11 say a person approves output from every agent they document: Carbide, CISO Assistant, Hyperproof, Iru, Optro, RealCISO, SafeBase by Drata, Screenata, SimpleRisk, TrustCloud and Whistic. For 13 platforms (Apptega, Comp AI, ComplyJet, Drata, LogicGate, Oneleet, OneTrust Certification Automation, Scytale, Secureframe, ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management, Sprinto, Thoropass and Vanta), the vendor documents approval for some agents; for the rest it either makes the step optional or does not say. The other 8 do not document an approval step: Anecdotes, Conveyor, Delve, Onspring, Scrut Automation, Strike Graph, Trustero and Zania. ISMS.online documents no AI agent.
A platform-level answer can hide an agent-level difference. Drata, for example, documents a review step for some of its agents and lets customers choose for others, such as its newer questionnaire agent. The table counts a platform as Required only when every available agent it documents has a review step.
Ask to see the review step in the demo. An approval that is optional, or that an administrator can switch off, is a different control from one the product enforces.
Is your data used to train the models, and which AI providers process it?
Of the 33 platforms, 17 say customer data is not used to train models. Conveyor and Drata say customer data is not used by default and document exceptions. ServiceNow Integrated Risk Management says it uses customer data to train models unless you opt out. The other 13 do not document a training policy.
The AI providers behind the agents are named by 17 of the 33, and 15 of those use models from OpenAI, Anthropic or both. CISO Assistant and SimpleRisk let you choose the model. The other 14 do not say. Where the table says Not documented, ask for the answer in writing before you rely on the agents.
These answers cover the platform's own agents. When you connect your own assistant over MCP instead, your compliance data goes to that assistant's provider under its terms, not the platform's.
Which platforms let you connect your own AI assistant?
Of the 33 platforms, 19 run an official MCP server, which lets an assistant such as Claude or ChatGPT read or change your compliance records: Anecdotes, Carbide, CISO Assistant, Comp AI, Conveyor, Drata, LogicGate, Oneleet, Optro, SafeBase by Drata, Screenata, Scrut Automation, Secureframe, SimpleRisk, Sprinto, Strike Graph, Thoropass, Vanta and Whistic. Before you connect one, compare what each server can read, change or delete, who can connect it, and whether its actions are logged.
What will your SOC 2 auditor ask about the platform's AI?
Agent output that changes records in your compliance platform, or goes to customers as questionnaire answers, falls under your change and approval controls like any other change. Expect your auditor to ask who approved it, what the agent was allowed to do, and where that is recorded. The platform's AI provider also processes your data, so add it to your vendor inventory. No AI-specific Trust Services Criteria exist yet; auditors apply the existing ones.
Frequently asked.
What is AI compliance software?
Compliance software whose built-in AI agents do part of the work, such as answering security questionnaires, collecting evidence, mapping policies to controls and suggesting fixes. The term also covers software for governing your own AI systems, which is a different product; for that, see ISO 42001 software for AI startups.
Can AI replace GRC work?
Partly. Agents draft questionnaire answers, map policies to controls and chase evidence, and assistants can update records through MCP. Judgement stays with people: a control owner approves changes, and a licensed CPA firm still performs the SOC 2 audit and decides whether the controls worked.