Install
$ agentstack add skill-kirkruglov-claude-skills-kit-generate-risk-register ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
generate-risk-register
Triggers
Russian: «сформируй реестр рисков», «подготовь risk register», «обнови реестр рисков» English: "generate risk register", "create risk register", "update risk register"
Language Detection
Determine the language of the user's request:
- If the request is in Russian → use templates with
-rusuffix - Otherwise → use templates with
-ensuffix
All output (headings, labels, comments, instructions) must match the detected language.
1. Input Data
Initial mode (phase 1)
| Data | Required | Source | Notes | |------|:--------:|--------|-------| | Project charter (project-charter.md) | yes | knowledge | Primary context: goal, scope, timeline, budget, constraints, assumptions | | Project type / industry | no | chat or knowledge | Used to select industry-typical risks. If not specified — agent infers from charter | | Additional context | no | chat | User comments on specific risks |
Detailed mode (phase 2)
| Data | Required | Source | Notes | |------|:--------:|--------|-------| | Project charter (project-charter.md) | yes | knowledge | Project context | | Project plan (project-plan.md) | yes | knowledge | WBS, timeline, resources, dependencies — source of new risks | | Risk register v1 (risk-register.md) | yes | knowledge | Output of initial mode — base for update | | Additional context | no | chat | New risks identified by the user |
If required data is missing — request using this template:
To generate the risk register, the following is required:
— Initial mode: approved project charter (project-charter.md).
— Detailed mode: charter + project plan (project-plan.md) + current risk register (risk-register.md).
Available data: [list what is available].
Missing: [be specific].
2. Execution Algorithm
- Determine mode. If the user has not specified — infer from context: project plan present → detailed, charter only → initial. If ambiguous — ask.
- Verify input data. Minimum data for the selected mode is present → step 3. Missing → request using the template from §1. Do NOT generate a placeholder or sample register.
- Read the template
risk-register-ru.mdorrisk-register-en.mdfrom project knowledge (based on detected language). - Identify risks.
- Initial: Analyze the charter from scratch — goal, scope (included and excluded), timeline, budget, constraints, assumptions, team composition. For each charter section evaluate: what could go wrong? Use categories from the reference table (§3). Recommended count: 5–10 risks. Do not automatically copy the top-3 risks from the charter — perform an independent analysis (charter risks may enter the register if confirmed by analysis).
- Detailed: Use register v1 as the base. Analyze the project plan: WBS (which work packages are highest risk?), critical path, dependencies, resource constraints. Add new risks. Update assessments of existing risks (probability/impact may have changed). For each risk — link to WP-xxx from the plan, assign a specific owner from project-plan. Specify actions concretely.
- Assess each risk using the scale from the reference table (§3): category, probability (H/M/L), impact (H/M/L), level, strategy (Avoid/Mitigate/Transfer/Accept). Level is calculated strictly by the table below — not by intuition or proximity to adjacent cells:
| Probability | Impact | Level | |-------------|--------|-------| | H | H | Critical | | H | M | High | | M | H | High | | H | L | Medium | | M | M | Medium | | L | H | Medium | | M | L | Low | | L | M | Low | | L | L | Low |
Common error: H×M and M×H are High, not Medium. Verify every risk against this table before recording in the register.
- Fill the register table following the rules in §3.
- Fill the risk matrix. For each risk, perform 3 steps:
- (a) Read from the table: probability → this is the ROW of the matrix; impact → this is the COLUMN of the matrix.
- (b) Find the cell at the intersection of that row and column → write the ID.
- (c) Verify: matrix row = probability from the table? matrix column = impact from the table? If not — correct.
Common error: for risks with L (low) probability, the ID is incorrectly placed in the "Medium" row instead of "Low". Verify each L-probability risk separately.
- Validate the result using the checklist (§5).
- Present the result in chat. Format:
- What was done: "Risk register generated (mode: initial/detailed) based on [list sources]."
- Number of risks: N (including critical: M).
- Assumptions (if any).
- Action required: "Approve, provide comments, or reject."
- Do not include system file paths.
- [register content]
- Wait for user response.
- Approval → produce final text.
- Comments → revise, show updated version. After 3rd iteration — ask: "Continue revising or finalize current version?"
- After approval — complete both steps:
- Provide the user with text to insert into log.md and project-state.md.
- Propose the specific next skill. This is a mandatory part of the response — without it the skill chain breaks. Use these exact phrases:
- Initial: "Risk register approved. Next task: generate-project-plan (project plan). Start?"
- Detailed: "Risk register updated. Next task: generate-comm-plan (communication plan). Start?"
3. Filling Rules
Header metadata
Version: 1.0 (initial) or 2.0 (detailed when updating v1).Date: current generation date (YYYY-MM-DD).File:risk-register.md.Document status:draft(at generation). After user approval —approved.Mode:initialordetailed.Source: list source files (e.g., "project-charter.md" or "project-charter.md, project-plan.md, risk-register.md v1").
Register table
The table contains exactly 10 columns (no more, no less): ID, Risk, Category, Probability, Impact, Level, Strategy, Actions, Owner, Status. Adding extra columns is prohibited — it breaks compatibility with the template and other skills. The difference between modes is in the depth of content:
| Column | Initial | Detailed | |--------|---------|----------| | ID | R001, R002, ... | Retain IDs from v1 for existing risks. New risks — next sequential number | | Risk | Wording: "Event → consequence for the project" | Same, refine wording if needed | | Category | From reference table (see below) | Same | | Probability | H/M/L | Reassess using plan data | | Impact | H/M/L | Reassess using plan data | | Level | Per matrix (see below) | Recalculate | | Strategy | From reference table (see below) | Refine if needed | | Actions | Brief, 1–2 sentences | Specific steps linked to WP-xxx from the plan | | Owner | PM (default) or "assign during planning" | Specific team member from project-plan | | Status | open | open / in progress / closed / triggered |
Category reference table
| Category | Description | Examples | |----------|-------------|---------| | Technical | Technologies, architecture, integrations | System incompatibility, architecture errors | | Resource | People, competencies, availability | Loss of key specialist, skill gaps | | External | Factors outside team control | Regulatory changes, competitor actions | | Organizational | Processes, communication, decision-making | Approval delays, priority conflicts | | Financial | Budget, pricing, ROI | Budget overrun, contractor rate changes |
Assessment scale
| Rating | Probability | Impact | |--------|-------------|--------| | H (High) | >60% — likely to occur | Critical: schedule slip >2 weeks, budget >20%, scope substantially changes | | M (Medium) | 30–60% — may occur | Significant: schedule 1–2 weeks, budget 10–20%, scope partially affected | | L (Low) | damage, or risk is outside team control | Monitor without active steps, budget reserve |
Risk matrix (visualization)
Place risk IDs in the matrix cells from the template. Each risk goes into one cell corresponding to its probability and impact assessment.
4. Placeholder Table
> Placeholders {{}} in the template are fill-in guides, not auto-substitution variables. Replace each with the corresponding value from the input data.
| Placeholder | Required | Source | Allowed values | |-------------|:--------:|--------|---------------| | {{project_name}} | yes | project charter | text | | {{version}} | yes | agent | 1.0 (initial), 2.0 (detailed when updating v1) | | {{date}} | yes | system | YYYY-MM-DD | | {{mode}} | yes | agent / user | initial or detailed | | {{source_docs}} | yes | agent | list of source files | | {{risk_description}} | yes (≥5 for initial, ≥ count in v1 for detailed) | agent | wording: "event → consequence" | | {{category}} | yes | agent | one of the 5 categories from the reference table | | {{level}} | yes | agent | Critical / High / Medium / Low (per matrix) | | {{strategy}} | yes | agent | Avoid / Mitigate / Transfer / Accept | | {{actions}} | yes | agent | text, 1–2 sentences (initial) or specific steps with WP-xxx (detailed) | | {{owner}} | yes | agent / project-plan | name or role. Initial: PM by default. Detailed: specific team member |
5. Validation Checklist
Before presenting the result to the user — verify:
- [ ] All required placeholders replaced with values
- [ ] No
{{}}placeholders remaining in the text - [ ] Mode (initial/detailed) specified in the header
- [ ] Initial: ≥5 risks covering ≥3 categories from the reference table
- [ ] Detailed: all risks from v1 are present (updated or closed) + new risks from the plan
- [ ] Each risk: wording is "event → consequence", not just a topic
- [ ] Assessments are consistent: for EACH risk calculate the level using the table in §2 step 5 and COMPARE with the recorded value. Special attention: H×M=High (not Medium), M×H=High (not Medium)
- [ ] Strategy matches context (not "Accept" for a critical risk without justification)
- [ ] Detailed: each risk linked to WP-xxx, owner is a specific person
- [ ] Risk matrix is filled in, IDs match the table
- [ ] Matrix-table synchronization (element by element): for EACH risk write the triple: ID → probability from table → matrix row; ID → impact from table → matrix column. If row ≠ probability or column ≠ impact — CORRECT. Special attention: risks with L probability frequently end up in the "Medium" row
- [ ] All agent assumptions listed in the response
- [ ] Document status =
draft
6. Dependencies
Consumes (input):
project-charter.md← generate-charter (both modes)project-plan.md← generate-project-plan (detailed only)risk-register.mdv1 ← generate-risk-register initial (detailed only)
Produces (output): risk-register.md → consumed by:
generate-project-plan— for incorporating risks during planning (if initial)generate-closure-report— for final analysis (if detailed)
After the register is approved, the user must upload risk-register.md to the project knowledge base so it is available to dependent skills.
7. Usage Examples
Initial (phase 1)
User command:
> Generate the risk register. Project charter is in knowledge.
Agent response (after generation):
> Risk register generated (mode: initial) based on: project-charter.md. > > Identified 7 risks (critical: 1, high: 2, medium: 3, low: 1). Categories covered: Technical, Resource, External, Organizational. > > Assumptions: > - Project type inferred as "IT product launch" from the charter description. > - All risk owners set to PM (to be specified in detailed mode after the project plan is ready). > > Action required: approve, provide comments, or reject. > > [register content]
Detailed (phase 2)
User command:
> Update the risk register. Project plan and current register are in knowledge.
Agent response (after generation):
> Risk register updated (mode: detailed) based on: project-charter.md, project-plan.md, risk-register.md v1. > > Risks in register: 11 (was 7). New: 4 (from WBS and resource plan analysis). Updated assessments: R003 escalated to "High" (external contractor dependency identified). All risks linked to work packages, owners assigned. > > Assumptions: > - Owners assigned based on roles from project-plan.md. > > Action required: approve, provide comments, or reject. > > [register content]
Change Log
| Date | Version | Change | |------|---------|--------| | 2026-03-29 | 2.0 | Translated to English per translation-rules.md. Language Detection block and bilingual triggers added. Template references updated to -ru/-en suffixes | | 2026-03-26 | 1.2 | Based on benchmark v1.1 results (96.1%, 3 failures — all D_logic): added explicit level calculation table (9 combinations) in §2 step 5 with emphasis on H×M=High; strengthened §2 step 7 (3-step matrix fill procedure with L-probability warning); strengthened §5 step 7 (row-by-row level verification) and §5 step 11 (element-by-element verification with triple extraction) | | 2026-03-25 | 1.1 | Based on benchmark results (94.7%, 4 failures): strengthened §2 step 11 (mandatory next skill recommendation with exact phrasing), added matrix-table synchronization check in §5 and §2 step 7, fixed 10-column constraint in §3 with prohibition on adding columns | | 2026-03-25 | 1.0 | Skill created |
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: KirKruglov
- Source: KirKruglov/claude-skills-kit
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.