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 vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills --skill purview-data-lifecyclegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-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/vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills/purview-data-lifecycle)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills/purview-data-lifecycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills/purview-data-lifecycle/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/vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills/purview-data-lifecycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills/purview-data-lifecycle.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 | $0.00095 | $0.01171 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00585 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00234 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
purview-data-lifecycle 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle & Records Management
Data Lifecycle Management (retention policies and labels) and Records Management govern how long content is retained and when it is deleted across Microsoft 365 - meeting regulatory, legal, and business requirements while reducing risk and cost from over-retention.
When to use
Implementing retention and disposition for Exchange, SharePoint, OneDrive, and Teams, and managing formal records (including regulatory records) with a defensible file plan.
Do not use this skill for legal-hold preservation tied to a specific matter (use
purview-ediscovery) or for audit log retention (use purview-audit).
Pick the right control
| Need | Use |
|---|---|
| Retain or delete content at a location level (whole mailbox/site) | Retention policy |
| Item-level retain/delete, label-driven workflow | Retention label |
| Immutable, regulator-grade record | Regulatory record (label-based) |
| Triggered retention (start clock on event, e.g., contract end) | Event-based retention |
| Policies that adapt as users move/leave | Adaptive scopes (query-based) |
| One-time targeted scope | Static scope |
Rule of thumb: policies for breadth, labels for precision, adaptive scopes by default so the policy follows the org, not the org chart of two years ago.
Approach
- Define requirements - Map regulatory/legal/business retention rules to content types and locations; build a retention schedule / file plan with the records manager. Verify: each retention rule cites a regulation or business owner approval.
- Retention policies vs labels - Use retention policies for broad location-level retain/delete; use retention labels for item-level control and records declaration. Verify: each rule in the file plan is mapped to either a policy or a label, not both.
- Adaptive scopes - Prefer adaptive scopes (query-based on user/site/group attributes) over static scopes so policies stay current as the org changes. Verify: scope queries return expected user/site sets in preview.
- Records management - Declare records / regulatory records where immutability is required; build the file plan with retention triggers (event-based where needed). Verify: records cannot be edited or deleted outside the disposition workflow.
- Auto-apply labels - Configure auto-apply rules based on SITs, classifiers, or keywords in simulation first; review impact before broad rollout. Verify: simulation shows expected match coverage and few false positives.
- Disposition - Configure disposition review so reviewers approve deletion of labelled content; capture proof of disposition for audit. Verify: disposition queue populates and reviewer notifications fire.
- Operate - Quarterly review of policy coverage, disposition backlog, and file plan drift against new regulations.
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 · 92 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A ec5a067e0a0b
purview-data-lifecycle is a skill published in the GitHub repository vinayaklatthe/microsoft-security-skills (173 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 95 tokens to every session and 1,171 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
rfp-response-compliance-review
Reviews a draft proposal against the firm's configurable compliance rules — prohibited language, required disclosures, role and positioning boundaries, and procurement-submission requirements. Logs all findings to the Review Findings SharePoint list and annotates the draft document for salesperson and reviewer…
power-automate
Use when operating Microsoft Power Automate cloud flows from code — create, enable, update, list or delete via the Dataverse Web API (workflow table, category 5) with Entra ID OAuth2, plus run-history debugging. NOT designing the flow definition (that is automation-flows), NOT picking a platform by billing model (that…
carta-witness-signatures
Status of witness and spousal-consent signature requests on option grants, RSAs, PIUs — who still needs to sign, and what's awaiting signature, signed, or expired. Covers one award, one company, or a whole portfolio. Read-only.
carta-hmrc-limits
Report a UK company's HMRC EMI/CSOP limit usage. Use when asked how much EMI allowance is left, whether the company is near the £6m EMI limit, who is close to or over their £250k individual limit, CSOP headroom, or whether a planned grant fits.
carta-interaction-reference-core
The non-negotiable half of Carta's AI agent interaction rules — financial precision, data provenance, the AI-computation gate, how to confirm, and trust & safety. Loaded ONCE per conversation, before any response that presents or writes Carta financial data. Sufficient on its own for write flows; a flow that also…
compliance-verifier
Use this agent to validate deployments against GDPR, HIPAA, SOC2, and other regulatory compliance frameworks and generate audit reports.