Risk Response PatternsSAFE

An agent skill published by revfactory.

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: risk-response-patterns
description: "risk response strategy pattern library. response-strategist and monitoring-planner agent risk response plan establishto do when reference. 'risk response', 'mitigation strategy', 'response plan' request when usage. However, insurance design legal risk specialistdocument scope outside."
---

# Risk Response Patterns — risk response strategy pattern

response-strategist / monitoring-planner agent response plan establish competency .

## 4versus response strategy 

| strategy | description | quality condition | cost |
|------|------|----------|------|
| **avoidance (Avoid)** | risk cause | score ≥16, possible | High |
| **transfer (Transfer)** | 3specialistto responsibility before | financialquality impact, specialistnature insufficient | duringbetween |
| **mitigation (Mitigate)** | probability/impact decrease | versusdepartmentminute risk | duringbetween |
| **acceptance (Accept)** | risk number | score ≤4, cost > and | Low |

### strategyby detailed pattern

#### avoidance (Avoid)

```
pattern:
- scope : risk feature excluded
- technical change: verifydone technical versus
- schedule annual: minuteKorean time secure
- change: nature vendor

examplewhen:
 risk: "technical A plannature un-verify"
 avoidance: "verifydone technical B versus, feature limitation acceptance"
 cost: development ₩3 only addition, feature 20% 
```

#### transfer (Transfer)

```
pattern:
- insurance: re-/company risk
- sourcing: specialistnature insufficient 
- totalapprox.: /person 
- report: nature report

examplewhen:
 risk: "delivery date degreeannualas personKorean cancellation fee"
 transfer: "vendor and delivery date annual cancellation fee totalapprox."
 cost: totalapprox. 5% 
```

#### mitigation (Mitigate)

```
probability decrease pattern:
- companybefore verify (PoC, Pilot)
- training/training
- review/number process
- during/

impact decrease pattern:
- example specialistKRW secure
- versus approach preparation
- stageby implementation (pointquality)
- monitoring 

examplewhen:
 risk: "core personcapability " (probability 3, impact 5 = 15)
 mitigation: "degree tax + personcapability degree"
 residual: probability 3, impact 3 = 9 (🟡)
```

#### acceptance (Accept)

```
quality acceptance:
- example (Contingency)
- versus plan establish (Plan B)
- setting + response procedure

numberquality acceptance:
- occurrence when versus (score ≤4)
- cost versus response value Low
```

## risk response planfrom template

```markdown
## risk R01: [riskpeople]

### current assessment
- probability: [N] / impact: [N] / score: [N×N] / etc.grade: 

### response strategy: [avoidance/transfer/mitigation/acceptance]

### response action
| # | action | responsible | deadline | cost | status |
|---|------|------|------|------|------|
| 1 | [ action] | [name] | [date] | [amount] | progressduring |
| 2 | [ action] | [name] | [date] | [amount] | un-number |

### residual risk
- response after probability: [N] / impact: [N] / score: [N×N]

### /basis report
- KRI: [indicator] > [total] when nature
- monitoring cycle: [weekbetween/monthbetween]

### versus plan (Plan B)
- [response failure when gap]
```

## risk monitoring dashboard

### risk (current vs goal)

```
current status:
🔴 : 2case (R01, R05)
🟠 High: 3case (R02, R07, R09)
🟡 report: 5case
🟢 Low: 8case

response after goal:
🔴 : 0case
🟠 High: 1case (R05)
🟡 report: 4case
🟢 Low: 13case
```

### trend tracking

| risk | beforemonth | month | tax | reason |
|--------|------|------|------|------|
| R01 | 🔴 20 | 🟠 12 | ↓ improvement | mitigation action and |
| R05 | 🟠 15 | 🔴 16 | ↑ | issue findings |

## quality checklist

| item | standard |
|------|------|
| response strategy | 4versus strategy during specifyquality optional |
| action nature | responsible+deadline+cost specify |
| residual risk | response after re-assessment figure |
| | KRI + total setting |
| Plan B | /High etc.grade versusplan |
| cost and | response cost < risk EMV |

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

What the source does

Filesystem

none-observed

Network

none-observed

Shell

none-observed

Dependencies

pinned

Secrets in source

none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.