Security Checklist Skill
Run a pre-release security checklist and capture audit-ready evidence automatically. Built for DevSecOps pipelines, compliance reviews, and release sign-offs.
Security Checklist Skill
TL;DR
Security Checklist is a release-readiness skill, not a vulnerability scanner pretending to be a process. Its job is to walk through a defined pre-release checklist, gather evidence from the repository and delivery workflow, and present a record that another person can review later. That evidence trail is what separates a real check from a box-ticking ritual.
Teams often get fooled by green indicators. CI passed, dependency alerts are quiet, the secret scan found nothing, so everyone assumes the release is safe. That is a dangerous shortcut. Security failures usually live in the gaps between tools, the unreviewed admin endpoint, the ignored exception, the unchecked environment variable, or the privileged workflow that nobody revisited after the first version shipped.
This skill is valuable because it treats security review as a checklist with proof, not vibes. It asks what was checked, when it was checked, what the result was, and what was not covered.
What it does
- Runs a release-oriented checklist across repository settings, workflows, and known security gates.
- Captures evidence such as scan timestamps, workflow results, policy statuses, and linked issues.
- Highlights coverage gaps where the checklist is green only because a test or scan was never enabled.
- Summarizes unresolved findings by severity, owner, and release impact.
- Produces an audit-friendly output that can be attached to a release ticket or compliance review.
- Calls out exceptions and waivers so temporary risk acceptance is visible instead of buried.
Best for
This skill belongs near the end of a release process, right before a build goes live or enters a change approval step. Platform teams use it before infrastructure releases. Product engineering teams use it before major launches. Security teams use it during periodic control reviews when they need a consistent package of evidence rather than a verbal update.
It is not a substitute for testing, code review, or threat modeling. Think of it as the final structured checkpoint that proves those steps happened, and that any exceptions are written down instead of remembered informally.
How to use
Worked example
Assume your team is preparing release v4.8.0 for a SaaS product. The repo has GitHub Actions, code scanning, dependency alerts, and a release issue template.
Request:
“Run the release security checklist for v4.8.0. Verify that secret scanning, dependency review, SAST, branch protection, and production approval workflow checks have evidence from the current release cycle. Summarize any open findings and list missing proof.”
Example output:
Release: v4.8.0
Checklist status: At risk
| Control | Result | Evidence | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Secret scanning enabled | Pass | Repo setting confirmed, 2026-03-28 | No open secret alerts |
| SAST run on release branch | Pass | Action codeql.yml run #1842 | Completed in 9m 12s |
| Dependency review | Pass | PR #991 check suite | 2 medium issues accepted previously |
| Branch protection on main | Pass | Required reviews: 2 | Admin bypass disabled |
| Production deploy approval | Missing evidence | No signed approval artifact attached | Release cannot be marked complete |
| Security exceptions reviewed | Fail | Waiver SEC-117 expired | Needs renewal or remediation |
Summary:
- Security automation is present, but release evidence is incomplete.
- One exception expired before the target release date.
- Production deployment approval has not been attached to the release record.
That result is useful because it tells the release manager what is blocking sign-off without pretending the whole release is unsafe.
Why evidence beats green checks
A common failure mode in DevSecOps is assuming a control exists because the configuration exists. A workflow file sitting in .github/workflows does not prove the check ran on the release branch. A dependency policy does not prove the last exception was reviewed. Security work needs timestamps, artifact links, and ownership. Without that, you are left with a false sense of control.
This skill helps by separating three states clearly: pass, fail, and not proven. The last state is the one that saves teams from embarrassing audit conversations later.
Permissions and risk
Required permissions: Repo API
Risk level: Medium
The skill reads repository configuration and workflow data, which is usually safe, but the output may expose process weaknesses or unreviewed exceptions. Treat the resulting report as internal security material. Share it with the people who need it, not with the whole company by default.
Troubleshooting
-
Everything looks green, but the report still says coverage is incomplete
The skill may be missing release-cycle evidence, not the control itself. Check whether the relevant scans actually ran for the release branch or tag. -
OWASP-style checks appear underrepresented
The checklist only reflects configured controls. If your pipeline does not test for certain classes of issues, the report should show a coverage gap rather than invent a pass. -
Evidence links point to old workflow runs
Tighten the time window or specify the release tag so the skill pulls current evidence rather than the most recent run overall. -
An exception was marked accepted but still appears as a blocker
Review the expiration date and scope. Risk acceptances often lapse quietly or apply only to a specific environment. -
The report is too long for release managers to use
Ask for two outputs, a one-page summary for sign-off and a full appendix with evidence references. -
Repository permissions block parts of the checklist
Missing API access can look like missing security evidence. Confirm the token can read workflow results, branch settings, and relevant alerts.
Alternatives
- Snyk is strong for vulnerability management and policy reporting, especially when you want productized dashboards.
- GitHub Advanced Security works well when your code, workflows, and alerting already live in GitHub.
- OWASP ZAP is useful for dynamic application testing, but it covers only one slice of release security.
Links and sources
- Official docs: See provider documentation
- Repo or provider: See provider documentation
- Install instructions: See provider documentation