{
  "schema_version": 2,
  "kind": "shortening-method",
  "format": "agent-skill",
  "id": "risk-register",
  "name": "Risk register",
  "category": "Work",
  "summary": "Compress risk descriptions while preserving trigger, consequence, and response.",
  "use_cases": [
    "Project risk reviews",
    "Delivery risks",
    "Operational risk logs"
  ],
  "word_count": 153,
  "url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/risk-register/",
  "instructions_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/risk-register/SKILL.md",
  "skill_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/risk-register/SKILL.md",
  "json_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/risk-register/llms.txt",
  "plain_text_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/risk-register/prompt.txt",
  "license": "MIT",
  "sources_url": "https://sho.rten.it/sources/#risk-register",
  "skill_name": "risk-register",
  "skill_description": "Compress risk descriptions while preserving trigger, consequence, and response. Use for Project risk reviews, Delivery risks, Operational risk logs.",
  "agents_md_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/risk-register/AGENTS.md",
  "sources": [],
  "instructions": "Condense the supplied risk notes into a short register. Use this for uncertain future events; keep an issue that has already occurred clearly labeled as an issue.\n\nWrite each risk as a condition or trigger followed by a possible event and its consequence. Preserve the affected scope, likelihood, impact, time window, and evidence when the source supplies them. Do not assign missing scores, infer a probability from concern, or change \"could\" into \"will\".\n\nAttach the existing response, its owner, and the next review or action date. Separate measures already in place from proposed mitigations and fallback plans. Keep acceptance decisions and residual exposure if stated.\n\nUse one compact record per distinct risk with labels for Risk, Assessment, and Response. Merge duplicate descriptions only when their triggers and consequences match. Remove repeated expressions of worry; retain a reason that changes the assessment. Do not recommend new controls or treat a proposed response as approved.",
  "example": {
    "before": "For the pilot launch, the team is concerned that the supplier may deliver the test tablets after 12 August. If the tablets arrive after that date, the field trial could start one week late. The supplier has confirmed dispatch but has not supplied tracking, and likelihood has not been scored. The trial uses eight tablets. Rowan owns the risk and will review delivery status on 9 August. Borrowing eight tablets from the training team is a proposed fallback; training has not approved it. Separately, the training room booking has already been canceled. Facilities owns that issue and is looking for another room, with an update due on 8 August. The team mentioned the late-delivery concern twice because it is causing considerable anxiety.",
    "after": "Risk: Eight pilot tablets may arrive after 12 August. If they arrive late, the field trial could start one week late.\nAssessment: Dispatch confirmed; tracking absent. Likelihood unscored.\nResponse: Rowan reviews delivery on 9 August. Borrowing eight training tablets is a proposed, unapproved fallback.\n\nIssue: Training room booking is canceled.\nResponse: Facilities is seeking another room; update due 8 August.",
    "context": "Pilot delivery risk review",
    "must_preserve": [
      "Eight tablets; after 12 August; trial could delay one week",
      "Dispatch confirmed, tracking absent, likelihood unscored",
      "Rowan review 9 August",
      "Eight-tablet loan proposed and unapproved",
      "Room cancellation already occurred; Facilities update 8 August"
    ],
    "omitted": [
      "Repeated concern and expressions of anxiety"
    ],
    "kind": "illustrative"
  }
}