agentleFS
fzfcleefzfclee/consulting-skills/skills/risk-matrix/SKILL.md

risk-matrix

Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use when a plan, deal, project, or stakeholder move has material downside that needs explicit controls. Use when applying the Risk Matrix consulting method and when a user asks for Risk Matrix, method execution, structured diagnosis, or action planning.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Use this skill to run Risk Matrix as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.

    line 9
  2. Very specific:

    If an input is missing, do not block automatically.

    line 25
  3. Distinctive:

    Do not use when numeric ratings would create false precision or when thresholds and owners are undefined.

    line 29
  4. Distinctive:

    Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.

    line 85

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Risk Matrix

Use this skill to run Risk Matrix as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.

Method Notes

  • Define risk as event + cause + consequence.
  • Score likelihood, impact, and optional detectability, then assign owner and trigger.

Required Inputs

Collect or infer these inputs before execution:

  • planned action or project
  • risk list
  • impact definitions
  • owners

If an input is missing, do not block automatically. Mark it as missing, state the assumption used, and add a validation action.

When Not To Use

Do not use when numeric ratings would create false precision or when thresholds and owners are undefined. Treat legal, safety, and regulatory stop conditions separately from relative risk ranking.

Adjacent Methods

  • pre-mortem: surface failure modes before a defined plan starts.
  • scenario-planning: test strategy across uncertain external futures.

Step-by-Step Execution

StepRequired inputHow to executeOutput
Define objectivePlan/project/decision and success criteria.State what outcome risks threaten.Risk scope.
List risksAssumptions, dependencies, history, stakeholder input.Write each risk as event + cause + consequence.Risk register.
Score risksLikelihood, impact, detectability/evidence.Rate each risk using consistent anchors.Risk matrix.
Plan responsesTop risks and constraints.Assign mitigation, contingency, owner, and trigger.Risk response plan.
Set monitoringTriggers, cadence, governance.Define review rhythm and escalation threshold.Risk monitoring plan.

Output Template

### 1. Scope And Scales
Decision / plan:
Horizon:
Likelihood scale:
Impact scale:

### 2. Risk Register
| Risk event | Cause | Consequence | Likelihood | Impact | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |  |  |  |

### 3. Response
| Priority risk | Prevent / reduce / transfer / accept | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |  |

### 4. Monitoring
| Risk | Leading signal | Threshold | Contingency |
|---|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |  |

### Evidence And Next Decision
- Confirmed facts:
- Assumptions:
- Missing evidence:
- Next action, owner, and timing:
- Expected signal and decision threshold:

Quality Gate

  • Produce the method-specific outputs for Scope And Scales, Risk Register, Response; do not substitute a generic framework summary.
  • Tie every material score, causal claim, or stakeholder judgment to evidence or label it as an assumption.
  • Include at least one disconfirming check, sensitivity, alternative explanation, or failure condition appropriate to the method.
  • Convert the result into a named action or decision with an owner or stakeholder, timing, and observable signal.
  • State missing inputs and the smallest validation action instead of inventing precision.
  • Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.