Status: Stable
Version: 1.0.0
Author: Rifteo
Tags: reporting, security, risk
Summary
Given any security finding, vulnerability, or bug description, produce a prioritized, step-by-step remediation plan. Each step includes a title, a concise explanation, and an effort estimate so the team knows what to do and how hard it is.- Identifies the vulnerability class, root cause, and affected component from the input
- Orders steps by priority: immediate fixes first (stop the bleeding), then root cause fixes, then hardening to prevent recurrence
- Keeps each step actionable a developer can start implementing without follow-up questions
- Labels effort as Low / Medium / High with clear definitions, and flags any temporary compensating controls explicitly
SKILL.md file
Discover skill details
Discover skill details
Remediation Planner
Converts a security finding, vulnerability, or bug into a prioritized step-by-step remediation plan with effort estimates per step.When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when the user:- Provides a vulnerability, finding, or bug and needs a fix plan
- Asks “how do we fix this?” or “what’s the remediation for X?”
- Wants to estimate the work involved in addressing a finding
- Needs to present a remediation roadmap to developers or stakeholders
What Does It Check?
The skill analyzes the finding to identify the vulnerability class, root cause, and affected component. It then produces an ordered list of steps minimum set needed, no padding that a developer can follow directly.In scope:- Any vulnerability class: injection (SQLi, XSS, SSTI, SSRF), broken access control (IDOR, privilege escalation), authentication issues (JWT, session), cryptographic failures, misconfigurations
- Both immediate mitigations (compensating controls) and permanent fixes (root cause)
- Hardening steps to prevent recurrence
- Vulnerability discovery use a hunter skill (idor-hunter, xss-hunter, ssti-hunter) for that
- Generic security advice unrelated to the specific finding
How It Works
Step 1: Understand the FindingIdentify the vulnerability class, root cause, and affected component from the input. If the input is too vague to produce actionable steps, ask one clarifying question.Step 2: Order Steps by PriorityImmediate fixes first (stop the bleeding), then root cause fixes, then hardening to prevent recurrence. If a step is a temporary compensating control, label it clearly as such.Step 3: Write Each StepTitle + max 2-line description + effort label. No padding, no restating the problem. Steps must be actionable a developer should be able to start implementing without follow-up questions.Effort Scale
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Low | Quick config change, one-line fix, or a well-understood patch hours to a day |
| Medium | Requires code refactoring, moderate testing, or cross-team coordination days to a week |
| High | Architectural change, significant engineering work, or complex coordination weeks or more |
Output
Structured remediation plan with numbered steps, each containing a short action title, 2-line description, and effort label.Example output:Known Limitations
- If the finding is too vague (no vulnerability class, no affected component), one clarifying question will be asked before producing the plan
- If no concrete remediation exists (fundamental design flaw), the skill will state that clearly and describe the trade-offs of available mitigations instead
- Effort estimates are indicative actual effort depends on codebase size, test coverage, and team familiarity
Benchmark Results
Tested on claude-sonnet-4-6 via Claude Code CLI. Same prompt, same model, same target. The only variable is whether the skill is loaded.| Metric | Without Skill | With Skill |
|---|---|---|
| Turns to complete | 2 | 1 |
| Response tokens | ~2,419 | ~1,052 |
| Total time | 44s | 22s |
Related skills
finding-writer
Convert raw pentest notes into structured audit findings ready for reporting
risk-assessor
Score a vulnerability using likelihood × impact with SLA-bound remediation urgency
compliance-gap-analyzer
Identify compliance gaps and map findings to control frameworks

