≈551 tokens on demand. Your agent reads this file only when SKILL.md points to it.
Prioritization Pitfalls
Purpose: Use this file when the ranking looks biased, compressed, or too subjective.
Contents
- Risk-matrix pitfalls
- Scoring pitfalls
- Domain-specific bias
- Priority health checks
Risk-Matrix Pitfalls
| ID |
Pitfall |
Why it fails |
Corrective action |
RP-01 |
Range compression |
materially different risks get the same label |
use finer or normalized scales |
RP-02 |
Priority inversion |
lower quantitative risk gets a higher label |
cross-check with data |
RP-03 |
Subjective scoring |
each evaluator interprets risk differently |
define scoring anchors |
RP-04 |
Everything is critical |
real priorities disappear |
keep Critical <= 20% |
RP-05 |
Static ranking |
the environment changes but the plan does not |
reassess regularly |
RP-06 |
False confidence |
the matrix looks tidy but reality is not |
treat it as a discussion starter |
RP-07 |
Ignoring dependencies |
chained risks remain hidden |
model dependent scenarios |
RP-08 |
No resource mapping |
labels do not map to execution effort |
pair ranking with cost or impact |
Scoring Pitfalls
| Problem |
Why it fails |
Corrective action |
| arbitrary weights |
the order is unjustified |
base weights on domain data |
| naive linear scoring |
extreme values dominate strangely |
normalize or cap the scale |
| fixed value-risk tables |
scores drift out of context |
review periodically |
| skewed label thresholds |
nearly everything becomes HIGH |
use percentile or target distributions |
Useful percentile bands:
P90+ -> Critical
P70-89 -> High
P30-69 -> Medium
P0-29 -> Low
Domain-Specific Bias
| Domain |
Common bias |
Guardrail |
| test |
happy-path bias |
keep at least 30% abnormal or edge-oriented cases |
| risk |
CVSS-only bias |
add exposure and bypass ease |
| deploy |
production-only bias |
require staging coverage |
| experiment |
novelty bias |
keep measurement and segment realism |
Priority Health Checks
Critical <= 20%
Critical + High <= 30%
- not every case lands in the same bucket
- the ranking rationale is explainable in one sentence per case