risk-cycle
Continuously identify, assess, track, and retire risks throughout the SDLC with register and RAG reporting
Best use case
risk-cycle is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
It is a strong fit for teams already working in Codex.
Continuously identify, assess, track, and retire risks throughout the SDLC with register and RAG reporting
Teams using risk-cycle should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/risk-cycle/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How risk-cycle Compares
| Feature / Agent | risk-cycle | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Codex | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Continuously identify, assess, track, and retire risks throughout the SDLC with register and RAG reporting
Which AI agents support this skill?
This skill is designed for Codex.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
Cursor vs Codex for AI Workflows
Compare Cursor and Codex for AI coding workflows, repository assistance, debugging, refactoring, and reusable developer skills.
AI Agents for Coding
Browse AI agent skills for coding, debugging, testing, refactoring, code review, and developer workflows across Claude, Cursor, and Codex.
AI Agents for Marketing
Discover AI agents for marketing workflows, from SEO and content production to campaign research, outreach, and analytics.
SKILL.md Source
# risk-cycle
Continuous risk identification, assessment, tracking, and retirement throughout SDLC.
## Triggers
Alternate expressions and non-obvious activations (primary phrases are matched automatically from the skill description):
- "RAG status" / "RED/AMBER/GREEN" → risk dashboard summary
- "risk register" → update or view risk register
- "RAID log" → Risks/Assumptions/Issues/Dependencies log
## Purpose
This skill manages continuous risk management by:
- Identifying new risks from project activities
- Assessing risk severity and probability
- Tracking mitigation progress
- Escalating overdue or critical risks
- Retiring completed risk mitigations
- Generating risk reports for stakeholders
## Behavior
When triggered, this skill:
1. **Reviews current state**:
- Load risk register
- Check mitigation status
- Identify overdue items
2. **Identifies new risks**:
- Analyze recent changes
- Review technical decisions
- Check external factors
- Gather team input
3. **Assesses risks**:
- Score probability and impact
- Calculate risk score
- Prioritize by exposure
4. **Plans mitigations**:
- Assign owners
- Define mitigation actions
- Set target dates
5. **Tracks progress**:
- Update mitigation status
- Escalate overdue items
- Retire completed risks
6. **Reports status**:
- Generate risk dashboard
- Highlight top risks
- Show trend over time
## Risk Categories
### Technical Risks
```yaml
technical_risks:
architecture:
examples:
- Scalability bottleneck
- Single point of failure
- Technology obsolescence
- Integration complexity
indicators:
- Performance degradation
- System failures
- Upgrade difficulties
development:
examples:
- Technical debt accumulation
- Code quality issues
- Testing gaps
- Dependency vulnerabilities
indicators:
- Increasing bug count
- Slower velocity
- Failed deployments
security:
examples:
- Data breach potential
- Authentication weaknesses
- Compliance gaps
- Third-party risks
indicators:
- Security scan findings
- Audit failures
- Incident reports
```
### Project Risks
```yaml
project_risks:
schedule:
examples:
- Scope creep
- Delayed dependencies
- Unrealistic estimates
- Resource constraints
indicators:
- Missed milestones
- Velocity decline
- Scope changes
resource:
examples:
- Key person dependency
- Skill gaps
- Team turnover
- Burnout risk
indicators:
- Unbalanced workload
- Low morale
- Resignation signals
stakeholder:
examples:
- Changing requirements
- Sponsor availability
- Organizational changes
- Competing priorities
indicators:
- Decision delays
- Priority conflicts
- Reduced engagement
```
### External Risks
```yaml
external_risks:
market:
examples:
- Competitor actions
- Market shift
- Economic factors
- Regulatory changes
indicators:
- Market news
- Competitor releases
- Industry reports
vendor:
examples:
- Vendor stability
- API changes
- Price increases
- Support quality
indicators:
- Vendor communications
- Service issues
- Contract terms
compliance:
examples:
- Regulatory requirements
- Industry standards
- Audit requirements
- Data regulations
indicators:
- Regulatory updates
- Audit findings
- Compliance gaps
```
## Risk Assessment Matrix
### Probability Scoring
```yaml
probability:
certain:
score: 5
likelihood: ">90%"
description: "Almost certain to occur"
likely:
score: 4
likelihood: "60-90%"
description: "More likely than not"
possible:
score: 3
likelihood: "30-60%"
description: "Could occur"
unlikely:
score: 2
likelihood: "10-30%"
description: "Not expected but possible"
rare:
score: 1
likelihood: "<10%"
description: "Very unlikely"
```
### Impact Scoring
```yaml
impact:
catastrophic:
score: 5
schedule: ">3 months delay"
cost: ">50% budget"
quality: "Unusable product"
reputation: "Major damage"
major:
score: 4
schedule: "1-3 months delay"
cost: "25-50% budget"
quality: "Significant defects"
reputation: "Serious concern"
moderate:
score: 3
schedule: "2-4 weeks delay"
cost: "10-25% budget"
quality: "Noticeable issues"
reputation: "Some concern"
minor:
score: 2
schedule: "1-2 weeks delay"
cost: "5-10% budget"
quality: "Minor issues"
reputation: "Limited impact"
negligible:
score: 1
schedule: "<1 week delay"
cost: "<5% budget"
quality: "Trivial issues"
reputation: "No impact"
```
### Risk Score Matrix
```
│ Impact
│ 1 2 3 4 5
───────────┼─────────────────────
Prob 5 │ 5 10 15 20 25 ←Critical
4 │ 4 8 12 16 20
3 │ 3 6 9 12 15 ←High
2 │ 2 4 6 8 10
1 │ 1 2 3 4 5 ←Medium
└─────────────────────
↑ ↑
Low Medium
```
```yaml
risk_levels:
critical:
range: [20, 25]
response: "Immediate action required"
escalation: "Executive notification"
high:
range: [12, 19]
response: "Priority mitigation"
escalation: "Manager notification"
medium:
range: [6, 11]
response: "Planned mitigation"
escalation: "Team lead notification"
low:
range: [1, 5]
response: "Monitor and accept"
escalation: "None required"
```
## Risk Register Format
```markdown
# Risk Register
**Project**: [Name]
**Last Updated**: 2025-12-08
**Next Review**: 2025-12-15
## Summary Dashboard
| Risk Level | Count | Trend |
|------------|-------|-------|
| Critical | 1 | ↑ +1 |
| High | 3 | → 0 |
| Medium | 8 | ↓ -2 |
| Low | 12 | → 0 |
| **Total** | **24** | - |
### Risk Trend
```
Week 1: ████████████████████████ 24 risks
Week 2: ██████████████████████ 22 risks
Week 3: ████████████████████████ 24 risks (2 new)
Week 4: ████████████████████████ 24 risks
↑ Stable with critical +1
```
## Active Risks
### RISK-001: Database Scalability [CRITICAL]
| Attribute | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| ID | RISK-001 |
| Title | Database Scalability Bottleneck |
| Category | Technical / Architecture |
| Probability | 4 (Likely) |
| Impact | 5 (Catastrophic) |
| Score | 20 (Critical) |
| Owner | Sarah Chen |
| Status | Mitigating |
**Description**:
Current PostgreSQL single-instance architecture cannot handle projected 10x traffic growth. Performance degradation expected within 6 months.
**Impact if Realized**:
- Service degradation or outage
- Customer churn
- Revenue loss estimated at $500K/month
**Mitigation Plan**:
1. [x] Evaluate sharding options (complete)
2. [x] Design read replica architecture (complete)
3. [ ] Implement connection pooling (in progress, due Dec 15)
4. [ ] Deploy read replicas (planned, due Jan 15)
5. [ ] Implement sharding (planned, due Feb 15)
**Contingency**:
Emergency vertical scaling + temporary traffic limiting
**Progress**:
```
[████████████░░░░░░░░] 60%
```
---
### RISK-002: Key Person Dependency [HIGH]
| Attribute | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| ID | RISK-002 |
| Title | Key Person Dependency on Lead Architect |
| Category | Project / Resource |
| Probability | 3 (Possible) |
| Impact | 4 (Major) |
| Score | 12 (High) |
| Owner | David Kim |
| Status | Mitigating |
**Description**:
Lead architect holds critical system knowledge. No backup identified.
**Mitigation Plan**:
1. [ ] Document architecture decisions (in progress)
2. [ ] Schedule knowledge transfer sessions
3. [ ] Identify and train backup
---
## Recently Retired Risks
### RISK-012: Third-Party API Stability [RETIRED]
- **Retired**: 2025-12-01
- **Original Score**: 12 (High)
- **Mitigation**: Implemented circuit breaker and fallback
- **Outcome**: Risk eliminated through technical solution
---
## Risk Review Actions
### This Week
- [ ] Complete RISK-001 connection pooling
- [ ] Schedule RISK-002 knowledge transfer
- [ ] Review new vendor contract for RISK-008
### Overdue
- ⚠️ RISK-005: Security audit (2 days overdue)
- Owner: Elena Rodriguez
- Escalated to: Team Lead
```
## Usage Examples
### Risk Review
```
User: "Risk review"
Skill executes:
1. Load current risk register
2. Check mitigation status
3. Identify overdue items
4. Prompt for new risks
Output:
"Risk Review Summary
Current Status:
- Critical: 1 (RISK-001: DB Scalability) ← Action needed
- High: 3
- Medium: 8
- Low: 12
Mitigation Progress:
✅ RISK-001: 60% complete (on track)
✅ RISK-002: 40% complete (on track)
⚠️ RISK-005: Security audit 2 days overdue
Top Priority:
RISK-001 needs connection pooling by Dec 15
Questions:
1. Any new risks identified this week?
2. Update on RISK-005 delay?"
```
### Add New Risk
```
User: "New risk: vendor pricing increase"
Skill guides:
1. Capture risk details
2. Assess probability/impact
3. Add to register
Output:
"Adding New Risk
Let me capture the details:
**Title**: Vendor Pricing Increase
**Category**: External / Vendor
Assessment Questions:
1. How likely is this? (1-5)
2. What's the potential impact? (1-5)
3. When might this occur?
4. Who should own mitigation?
Or say 'quick add' to use defaults."
```
### Mitigate Risk
```
User: "Mitigate RISK-002"
Skill guides:
1. Review current mitigation plan
2. Update progress
3. Adjust actions if needed
Output:
"RISK-002: Key Person Dependency
Current Mitigation Plan:
1. [ ] Document architecture decisions (in progress)
2. [ ] Schedule knowledge transfer sessions
3. [ ] Identify and train backup
Current Progress: 40%
What would you like to update?
1. Mark task complete
2. Add new mitigation action
3. Adjust timeline
4. Escalate issue"
```
### Retire Risk
```
User: "Retire RISK-012"
Skill processes:
1. Verify mitigation complete
2. Document outcome
3. Move to retired list
Output:
"Retiring RISK-012: Third-Party API Stability
Verification:
- Circuit breaker: ✅ Implemented
- Fallback mechanism: ✅ Tested
- Monitoring: ✅ Active
Outcome Documentation:
Risk eliminated through technical solution.
No incidents since mitigation deployed (30 days).
✅ RISK-012 moved to retired risks.
Risk count: 24 → 23"
```
## Integration
This skill uses:
- `project-awareness`: Current phase and activity context
- `artifact-metadata`: Track risk artifact versions
- `decision-support`: Complex risk decisions
## Agent Orchestration
```yaml
agents:
risk_assessment:
agent: project-manager
focus: Project risk evaluation
technical_analysis:
agent: architecture-designer
focus: Technical risk assessment
condition: risk_category == "technical"
security_assessment:
agent: security-architect
focus: Security risk evaluation
condition: risk_category == "security"
```
## Configuration
### Review Schedule
```yaml
review_schedule:
weekly:
day: "Monday"
time: "10:00"
scope: active_risks
monthly:
day: 1
scope: full_register
phase_gate:
trigger: gate_check
scope: blocking_risks
```
### Escalation Rules
```yaml
escalation:
overdue:
threshold: 2_days
notify: owner_manager
critical_new:
threshold: score >= 20
notify: [project_manager, sponsor]
trend_increase:
threshold: 3_consecutive_increases
notify: project_manager
```
## Output Locations
- Risk register: `.aiwg/risks/risk-register.md`
- Risk reports: `.aiwg/risks/reports/`
- Retired risks: `.aiwg/risks/retired/`
- Risk trends: `.aiwg/risks/trends/`
## References
- Risk templates: templates/management/risk-*.md
- Risk matrix: docs/risk-assessment-matrix.md
- Escalation procedures: docs/risk-escalation.mdRelated Skills
flow-security-review-cycle
Orchestrate continuous security validation, threat modeling, vulnerability management, and security gate enforcement across SDLC phases
flow-risk-management-cycle
Orchestrate continuous risk identification, assessment, tracking, and retirement across SDLC phases
flow-retrospective-cycle
Orchestrate systematic retrospective cycle with structured feedback collection, improvement tracking, and action item management
aiwg-orchestrate
Route structured artifact work to AIWG workflows via MCP with zero parent context cost
venv-manager
Create, manage, and validate Python virtual environments. Use for project isolation and dependency management.
pytest-runner
Execute Python tests with pytest, supporting fixtures, markers, coverage, and parallel execution. Use for Python test automation.
vitest-runner
Execute JavaScript/TypeScript tests with Vitest, supporting coverage, watch mode, and parallel execution. Use for JS/TS test automation.
eslint-checker
Run ESLint for JavaScript/TypeScript code quality and style enforcement. Use for static analysis and auto-fixing.
repo-analyzer
Analyze GitHub repositories for structure, documentation, dependencies, and contribution patterns. Use for codebase understanding and health assessment.
pr-reviewer
Review GitHub pull requests for code quality, security, and best practices. Use for automated PR feedback and approval workflows.
YouTube Acquisition
yt-dlp patterns for acquiring content from YouTube and video platforms
Quality Filtering
Accept/reject logic and quality scoring heuristics for media content