Free self-assessment

EU AI Act Risk Classifier

Start with a real product scenario, then adjust the answers. The tool turns everyday AI use cases into a practical EU AI Act triage report with risk signals, documentation steps, and source links.

0/13 answered

Choose your AI scenario

The fixed questions are the legal risk signals. These scenario buttons translate common product ideas into those signals, prefill likely answers, and keep everything editable.

Pick a scenario to prefill likely answers, or skip this and answer the questionnaire manually. Scenario presets assume the AI system may be offered to EU users; change question 1 if that is not true.
1. Is the system offered in the EU market, used by EU users, operated by an EU entity, or are its outputs used in the EU?
2. Could it involve manipulative AI, exploitation of vulnerable groups, social scoring, banned biometric scraping, restricted emotion recognition, or restricted real-time remote biometric identification?
3. Does it use biometric identification, categorization, or emotion recognition?
4. Is it used for critical infrastructure, safety, or essential operations?
5. Is it used in education, admissions, testing, scoring, or student assessment?
6. Is it used for hiring, worker evaluation, task allocation, or employment decisions?
7. Does it affect access to credit, insurance, housing, public benefits, or essential services?
8. Is it used in healthcare, medical triage, patient support, or clinical workflows?
9. Is it used for law enforcement, migration, border control, courts, or democratic processes?
10. Does a user interact with it as a chatbot, assistant, or automated advisor?
11. Does it generate public text, images, audio, video, code, or recommendations?
12. Are outputs shown to customers, applicants, patients, workers, or the public?
13. Is there meaningful human review before any consequential decision?

Frequently asked questions

Is this legal advice?

No. It is a practical triage tool. Use it to find escalation signals and prepare better questions for a qualified adviser.

Does the tool save answers?

No. The current version runs in the browser and does not send questionnaire answers to a database.

Why does “not sure” matter?

Unclear EU scope, decision impact, or human oversight can change the classification. Unknown answers intentionally trigger review.

practical AI compliance self-assessment

Practical notes for EU AI Act Risk Classifier

EU AI Act Risk Classifier | Free AI Compliance Self-Assessment is maintained for founders, product managers, compliance owners, agencies, and small teams building AI workflows who need AI governance workflow. The goal is to help visitors complete a real task and leave with an AI inventory, risk note, disclosure draft, vendor question set, policy outline, or review workflow report, not only read a generic summary.

tool

Define the system

Start by naming the AI feature, users, decision impact, data categories, vendors, and the team member responsible for maintaining the review record.

tool

Separate triage from advice

Use the generated output as first-pass operational triage. Legal, medical, hiring, credit, education, biometric, and public-sector uses still need specialist review.

tool

Keep evidence

Save the output, assumptions, date, source links, and reviewer notes so the team can explain why a risk level, disclosure, or vendor question set was chosen.

Before relying on this page

  • Review high-impact use cases manually.
  • Keep policies and disclosures aligned with the real product behavior.
  • Re-run the workflow when vendors, data, or user impact changes.

Review record

How to use EU AI Act Risk Classifier in an AI compliance file

A compliance tool is useful when it leaves a traceable record. The output should name the AI system, explain the assumptions, and show what the team still needs to verify with product, legal, security, or vendor owners.

Describe the real system

Record the feature name, user group, decision impact, data sources, vendor dependencies, and the human owner. A generic "chatbot" label is rarely enough. A hiring assistant, support summarizer, medical triage bot, and product recommender can have very different risk profiles even if they all use language models.

Separate signal from conclusion

Treat this page as first-pass triage. It can flag high-risk areas, transparency duties, missing evidence, and questions to ask a vendor. It should not be treated as legal approval, clinical advice, hiring approval, credit approval, or permission to launch without human review.

Save evidence and changes

Save the generated result with the date, reviewer, source links, and unresolved questions. Update the record when the model, data, users, product flow, vendor, or region changes. This keeps the site useful for actual operators rather than only being a static explanation page.

Evidence checklist

  • Document what the AI system does and what it does not do.
  • Record whether the system influences employment, education, credit, public benefits, healthcare, biometric identification, safety, or other high-impact outcomes.
  • Keep vendor documentation, model notes, data descriptions, user notices, human oversight notes, and monitoring plans together.
  • Re-run the review when the product behavior changes, not only when the law changes.
  • Use specialist review for high-impact or regulated workflows before relying on any generated text.