cso

Overview of cso skill

What cso is for

cso is a security-audit skill for agents that need to review a codebase or workflow with a Chief Security Officer mindset. The cso skill focuses on infrastructure-first analysis: secrets exposure, dependency and supply-chain risk, CI/CD security, LLM and AI security, skill supply-chain checks, and core threat-modeling frameworks like OWASP Top 10 and STRIDE. It is most useful when you want a structured cso for Security Audit workflow instead of a generic “look for vulnerabilities” prompt.

Who should install it

Install cso if you need repeatable review behavior for repositories, deployments, or AI-enabled apps and you care about confidence thresholds, not just broad scanning. It fits security-minded builders, reviewers, and agents that must explain findings clearly before escalating them. It is less useful if you only want a lightweight checklist or a one-off surface scan with no follow-up verification.

What makes it different

The main differentiators are its mode system and its bias toward active verification. cso supports a daily mode with a high confidence gate and a comprehensive mode for deeper monthly-style audits. That makes the cso skill better suited to ongoing review workflows than ad hoc prompts, especially when you need trend tracking across runs and want to avoid noisy, low-value alerts.

How to Use cso skill

Install and trigger cso

Use the directory install flow for your platform, then invoke cso with a security-centered request, not a vague “review this repo.” The skill’s triggers include security audit, vulnerability checking, OWASP review, and CSO-style review language. In practice, a good cso install is only the start; the quality comes from giving the agent the target, scope, and risk tolerance up front.

Give the right input shape

For best cso usage, provide four things: the repository or component to inspect, the audit mode you want, any known concerns, and what counts as acceptable evidence. Example: “Audit this Node app in daily mode. Focus on secrets handling, dependency risk, and CI pipeline permissions. Report only issues with direct code or config evidence.” That is much stronger than “run cso on my app,” because it tells the skill where to look and how strict to be.

Read these files first

Start with SKILL.md, then inspect ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.md and SKILL.md.tmpl to understand the intended workflow and the generated structure. In the repo itself, there are no helper scripts or external references to lean on, so the skill file is the primary source of truth. For decision-making, pay attention to the preamble, plan-mode safe operations, skill invocation in plan mode, and routing behavior, since those affect how the audit actually runs.

Use the skill in a review workflow

Treat cso as a staged audit process, not a single pass. First establish scope and architecture, then ask for targeted checks, then request active verification of anything suspicious. If you are auditing an AI product, include prompt-injection, tool-permission, and retrieval risks in the first prompt so the skill does not optimize only for traditional web-app issues.

cso skill FAQ

Is cso better than a normal prompt?

Usually yes, if you need repeatability, explicit confidence thresholds, and a security workflow that goes beyond “find bugs.” A normal prompt can work for a quick look, but cso is designed to guide an agent through audit phases and constrain noisy output. If you want a durable cso guide for repeated use, the skill is the better fit.

Is it only for appsec or pentesting?

No. The cso skill covers infrastructure, CI/CD, dependency supply chain, and AI/LLM-specific concerns as well as traditional application security. That makes it a better match for modern product stacks than a narrow pentest checklist. It is still bounded by what the agent can inspect directly, so it should not be treated as a substitute for authenticated testing tools or human validation.

Can beginners use it?

Yes, if they can describe the system they want audited and accept that the first result may need refinement. Beginners get the best outcome when they provide repository type, stack, deployment path, and the exact risk they care about most. If those inputs are missing, cso may still work, but the output will be less focused.

When should I not use cso?

Do not use it when you only need a general code review, product QA, or non-security architecture advice. It is also not ideal when you cannot share enough context for a meaningful security pass, because the skill is strongest when it can compare code, config, and execution paths against a concrete threat model.

How to Improve cso skill

Give tighter audit scope

The biggest quality gain comes from narrowing the target. Instead of “check the repo,” say “audit auth, secrets, and GitHub Actions in daily mode” or “run a comprehensive cso pass on the payment service and deployment pipeline.” Clear scope helps the skill spend effort on actual risk rather than broad but shallow inspection.

Ask for evidence, not just findings

The most useful cso outputs cite file paths, config entries, and the specific trust boundary involved. If you want stronger results, tell the agent to include reproduction steps, affected components, and why the issue matters. This reduces false positives and makes the report actionable for engineering or security review.

Re-run after fixes or new signals

cso is strongest as an iterative review tool. After patching a finding, rerun the skill on the changed paths and ask it to compare the new state against the prior audit. For trend tracking, keep the same mode and scope where possible so changes in risk are easier to spot.

Watch for common failure modes

The main failure modes are overbroad scans, missing AI-specific risks, and reporting issues without direct evidence. If the first pass is too noisy, ask for a daily-mode rerun with a higher confidence bar. If the stack includes agents, RAG, or tool calling, explicitly request prompt-injection and permission-path checks so the cso skill does not stay at generic web security level.