Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add autohandai/community-skills --skill building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-trackinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/autohandai/community-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/autohandai/community-skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/autohandai/community-skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/autohandai/community-skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/autohandai/community-skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/autohandai/community-skills/building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00031 | $0.02510 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01255 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00502 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00251 |
Grade A, and why
building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
88% identical to building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking — 33 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 268 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Building Vulnerability Aging and SLA Tracking
Overview
With over 30,000 new vulnerabilities identified in 2024 (a 17% increase from the prior year), organizations must track how long vulnerabilities remain unpatched and whether remediation occurs within defined Service Level Agreements (SLAs). Vulnerability aging measures the time between discovery and remediation, while SLA tracking enforces severity-based deadlines. Industry benchmarks indicate standard SLAs of 14 days for critical, 30 days for high, 60 days for medium, and 90 days for low vulnerabilities, though more aggressive timelines (24-48 hours for actively exploited critical CVEs) are increasingly common. This skill covers designing SLA policies, building aging dashboards, implementing automated escalations, and generating compliance metrics.
Prerequisites
- Vulnerability management platform with historical scan data
- Asset inventory with criticality ratings
- ITSM/ticketing system for remediation tracking
- Reporting platform (Splunk, Elastic, Power BI, Grafana)
- Stakeholder agreement on SLA timelines and escalation procedures
Core Concepts
Standard Vulnerability SLA Framework
| Severity | CVSS Range | Standard SLA | Aggressive SLA | CISA KEV SLA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | 9.0-10.0 | 14 days | 48 hours | BOD 22-01 due date |
| High | 7.0-8.9 | 30 days | 7 days | 14 days |
| Medium | 4.0-6.9 | 60 days | 30 days | N/A |
| Low | 0.1-3.9 | 90 days | 60 days | N/A |
| Informational | 0.0 | Best effort | Best effort | N/A |
Adaptive SLA Modifiers
| Factor | Modifier | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Internet-facing asset | -50% SLA | Higher exposure risk |
| CISA KEV listed | Override to 48h | Active exploitation confirmed |
| EPSS > 0.7 | -50% SLA | High exploitation probability |
| Tier 1 (crown jewel) asset | -25% SLA | Maximum business impact |
| Compensating control in place | +25% SLA | Risk partially mitigated |
| Vendor patch unavailable | Exception with review date | Cannot remediate yet |
What ships with it
7 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 268 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A c9db6d636578
building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking is a skill published in the GitHub repository autohandai/community-skills (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 2,510 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking, differing in 33 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking
Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system to measure remediation performance against severity-based timelines and drive accountability.
building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking
Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system that measures time-to-remediation against severity-based deadlines (e.g. 14 days critical, 30 days high, 60 days medium, 90 days low), with automated escalations and compliance metrics reporting. Use when designing SLA policies, building…
building-vulnerability-aging-and-sla-tracking
Implement a vulnerability aging dashboard and SLA tracking system to measure remediation performance against severity-based timelines and drive accountability.
vuln-defectdojo
Vulnerability management and findings aggregation using DefectDojo. Centralizes security findings from all SecOpsAgentKit scanners (Semgrep, Bandit, ZAP, Trivy, Grype, Gitleaks, Nuclei, Checkov, Horusec) into a unified platform with automatic deduplication, SLA tracking, risk-based prioritization, and compliance…
GRC & Compliance
Governance, risk, and compliance — risk assessment and scoring, control mapping across NIST CSF 2.0 / ISO 27001:2022 / SOC 2 / CIS Controls v8, gap analysis, audit evidence preparation, and security policy generation.
implementing-iso-27001-information-security-management
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 is the international standard for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an Information Security Management System (ISMS). This skill covers the complete.