sbom-vulnerability-management-reviewer

name	sbom-vulnerability-management-reviewer
description	Review SBOM generation, CVE triage, VEX, exception processes, patch SLAs, and the vulnerability lifecycle.
version	1.1.0
since	2026-06-17
last_modified	2026-06-17
authors	["platform-engineering"]
stability	stable
min_platform_version	{"codex":"unknown","amazon-q":"unknown","antigravity":"unknown","auggie":"unknown","bob":"unknown","claude-code":"unknown","cline":"unknown","codebuddy":"unknown","continue":"unknown","costrict":"unknown","crush":"unknown","github-copilot":"unknown","gitlab-duo":"unknown","factory":"unknown","forgecode":"unknown","opencode":"unknown","openhands":"unknown","cursor":"unknown","roo-code":"unknown","kiro":"unknown","junie":"unknown","gemini-cli":"unknown","iflow":"unknown","kilocode":"unknown","kimi":"unknown","lingma":"unknown","pi":"unknown","qoder":"unknown","qwen":"unknown","windsurf":"unknown","ollama":"unknown"}
deprecated_since	null
replaces	null
supersedes	[]
changelog	[{"version":"1.1.0","date":"2026-06-17","change":"Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill"}]

Sbom Vulnerability Management Reviewer

Purpose

Review SBOM generation, CVE triage, VEX, exception processes, patch SLAs, and the vulnerability lifecycle. Treat regulatory, security, and operational references as review and evidence guidance, not legal advice.

When to use

• SBOM vulnerability management decisions, controls, or operating practices need independent review.
• A change affects SBOM vulnerability management artifacts such as SBOM, CVE report, VEX document, exception process, patch SLA, vulnerability ticket.
• The user needs evidence-oriented findings for risks such as missing component, untriaged CVE, invalid VEX claim, expired exception, SLA breach, lifecycle blind spot.
• Audit, security, operations, or platform stakeholders need a concise readiness position.
• Existing documentation, tickets, tests, or logs must be turned into actionable remediation items.

Operating model

1. Identify the relevant SBOM vulnerability management artifacts, owners, systems, environments, and review boundary.
2. Compare the available artifacts against expected signals such as CycloneDX or SPDX file, scanner output, reachability note, fix version, risk acceptance, closure evidence.
3. Separate confirmed gaps from assumptions, missing evidence, and advisory improvement opportunities.
4. Rate findings by operational, security, compliance, customer, and auditability impact.
5. Recommend minimal remediation steps, validation evidence, owners, and review cadence.

Spec-Driven Change Context

• Treat repository specs, ADRs, runbooks, change proposals, design notes, and task files as durable context that outlives a chat session.
• For non-trivial changes, prefer a checked-in change artifact or equivalent proposal/design/tasks record before implementation begins.
• Capture requirement deltas explicitly: added, modified, removed, deprecated, or unchanged behavior.
• Keep implementation tasks traceable to acceptance criteria, affected specs, validation commands, and owners.
• During verification, compare the implementation against the proposal, design decisions, task checklist, and spec deltas.
• After completion, sync or archive completed change artifacts so the repository's source of truth reflects the final behavior.
• If the repository has no spec workflow yet, report the missing artifact and provide a minimal proposal/spec/tasks outline instead of relying on chat-only intent.

Skill-Specific Review Scope

• Primary artifacts: SBOM, CVE report, VEX document, exception process, patch SLA, vulnerability ticket.
• Risk themes: missing component, untriaged CVE, invalid VEX claim, expired exception, SLA breach, lifecycle blind spot.