Approve pending Harness STO security exemptions (waivers) at their current scope or elevate them to Project, Org, or Account scope. Users say "approve" for both in-scope approval and higher-scope elevation — do not require the word "promote". Supports approving one exemption or a mixed list where each row has a different approval scope. Default workflow lists pending exemptions in chat (paginated preview) so the user picks by row number — no copying from the Harness UI. Use when a user wants to approve, sign off on, or clear pending exemptions, waive approvals, org-wide approval, or account-wide approval. Trigger phrases: approve exempt, approve exemption, approve waiver, sign off exemption, clear pending exemption, approve for org, approve for account, org-wide approval, account-wide approval, pending exemptions.
72
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Approve one or more Pending STO security exemptions. This skill covers the approval
workflow after someone has requested an exemption (see /exempt-vuln for creation).
Pending scope is only PROJECT, PIPELINE, or TARGET. Exemptions are requested at
project, pipeline, or target scope only (All Issues → project; Vulnerabilities tab → project,
pipeline, or target). STO does not create pending requests at org or account scope — those
wider scopes exist only after elevation on approve (body.scope ORG or ACCOUNT). You
will not see scope: ORG or scope: ACCOUNT on rows from status: Pending in normal flows.
If a list row shows ORG/ACCOUNT, it is already approved/widened (re-approve or a different
workflow), not a fresh pending request this skill targets.
Harness exposes two different "scope" ideas — do not mix them up:
| Concept | What it controls | How you use it |
|---|---|---|
| Listing scope | Which project's exemption queue you read | Always list at project scope. Never pass resource_scope='account' or 'org' to harness_list. |
| Approval scope | Where the exemption becomes effective after approval | Passed as body.scope on harness_execute — CURRENT, PROJECT, ORG, or ACCOUNT. |
Users almost always say approve, even when they want org- or account-wide coverage. Treat
"approve for org", "org-wide", and "at account level" as approve with elevation — the MCP
server routes those to the promote endpoint internally. You never need a separate
action='promote' call; always use action='approve' with the right body.scope.
Keep the Harness UI out of the loop. Do not ask the user to copy issue titles, CVEs, or
exemption IDs from the platform. Your default opening move is to list pending exemptions in
chat, show a numbered table, report total, and let them pick by row number (or narrow with
search if they volunteer a keyword). Pagination surfaces more rows on request — you never dump
the full queue at once.
You need org and project unless they are already in session defaults or a pasted Harness URL provides them.
Exemptions list URL shape (auto-extracts org/project):
…/ng/account/{accountId}/all/orgs/{org}/projects/{project}/sto/exemptions
Unless the user already picked row numbers from a table you showed in this same session,
call harness_list before asking them to choose anything. Do not send them to the Harness UI.
Chat is a narrow surface — dumping 50 pending rows is unreadable. Default behavior:
harness_list with status: Pending, size: 5, page: 0 (unless org/project are
still unknown — resolve those first).total from the response.items[] following _display_hint. Number rows 1–N to match
_action_id_by_row (1-based).total ≤ 5: show every row; ask which to approve.total > 5: show the first page and say something like:
{total} pending exemption(s) in this project. Showing rows 1–5 below. Pick by number (e.g.
1,1 and 3,2-4), say next for the next page, or give a search term to narrow (CVE, requester, issue title).
_nextPageHint exactly — keep size, status, and any search
identical; only increment page.harness_list
resource_type: "security_exemption"
org_id: <org>
project_id: <project>
filters:
status: "Pending"
size: 5
page: 0
search: "<optional — only when user narrows>"Rules:
status must be a single value (Pending), not comma-separated.size: 5 inside filters on every call in a pagination session. Do not bump
size mid-session unless the user explicitly asks for a larger page (e.g. "show 10").size and all other filters identical when paginating; follow _nextPageHint
verbatim.resource_scope, and never set org_id / project_id to words like org or
account — those are approval-scope phrases, not list overrides.The list response is optimized for chat:
items[] — display fields only (issue_title, severity, type, requested_by, target,
scope, reason, …). No exemption IDs in the table._action_id_by_row — maps row number (1-based on the current page) → exemption_id for
execute calls._display_hint — column layout; follow it.scope is the exemption's requested scope — expect only TARGET, PIPELINE,
or PROJECT for pending rows.After showing the table, always include:
total pending count (project-wide, not just this page).Render the prompt with a sample-inputs block every time. Do not paraphrase it down to "pick a number" — users need to see that they can mix scope and comments in one message. Template:
12 pending exemptions in this project. Showing rows 1–5 below.
Reply with row numbers and (optionally) the approval scope + a comment per row. Examples you can adapt:
1— approve row 1 at its current scope, no comment1 as-is— same, more explicit2 for project— widen row 2 to project scope3 for org/3 org-wide— elevate row 3 to org scope4 for account— elevate row 4 to account scope5 with comment "JIRA SEC-440, fix tracked"— approve at current scope with a note2 for org with comment "approved by AppSec review"— scope + comment together1, 3, 5 as-is— approve multiple rows at current scope1 as-is, 2 for org, 3 for account with comment "exception logged"— mixed scopes + commentSay next for rows 6–10, or give a search term (CVE, requester, title) to narrow.
Only add search to the list call when the user gives a keyword — do not require them to know
CVE or title text upfront. If the user just replies 1, 2 with no scope, default to CURRENT
(approve as-is) and ask once whether they want a comment before executing.
Say there are no pending exemptions in this project (for the current filter). Do not ask them to
check the UI — offer to list without search if they had narrowed, or confirm org/project.
Primary path: the user picks row numbers from your table. Map through
_action_id_by_row on the same page they selected from. If they say "next" and pick from a
later page, re-list that page (or keep page context) before mapping numbers.
| How they pick | What you do |
|---|---|
Row numbers (1, 1 and 3, 2-4) | Map through _action_id_by_row on the current page. Default scope CURRENT. |
Row + scope (2 for org, 3 as-is, 4 for account) | Map row → exemption_id; set body.scope per the Natural language → body.scope table. |
Row + comment (5 with comment "SEC-440") | Same as row pick; attach the quoted text as body.comment. |
Row + scope + comment (2 for org with comment "AppSec approved") | Combine both — one entry in the plan with scope and comment. |
Mixed list (1 as-is, 2 for org, 3 for account with comment "logged") | One plan entry per row; scopes and comments may differ per row. |
| "Next" / "next page" | Increment page per _nextPageHint; show the new table; wait for picks. |
Search term (log4j, requester name) | Re-list with search, reset to page: 0; show filtered preview. |
| Exemption ID (22-char Harness ID) | Accept if they paste one — but never ask for IDs; listing is the default. |
| "All on this page" | Every row on the current page only — confirm scope per row or one shared scope. |
When multiple rows match one search term, show the filtered table and ask which row(s) — do not guess.
If the user gives a vague approve request with no row numbers yet ("approve pending exemptions", "sign off waivers"), go back to Step 2 — list first, then ask them to pick. Do not execute until they choose from the surfaced table (or confirm "all on this page" with explicit scope).
For a mixed batch, the user may assign a different approval scope per exemption in one message, for example:
Approve #1 as-is, #2 for org, #3 for account.
Build an internal plan: { exemption_id, approval_scope, issue_title }[] — one entry per
exemption, scopes may differ.
body.scopebody.scope is required on every approve call. It is the approval scope (where the
exemption takes effect), not the pending row's current scope label.
body.scope is always one of CURRENT, PROJECT, ORG, or ACCOUNT. It
names the destination after approval. The list row's scope is always the starting
request scope (TARGET, PIPELINE, or PROJECT only). Elevation uses /promote when the
destination is wider than “approve as-is”; the MCP routes that from action='approve'.
Pending scope (start) | User intent | body.scope (destination) |
|---|---|---|
TARGET | Approve as requested | CURRENT |
TARGET | Widen to project | PROJECT |
TARGET | Widen to org (skip project OK) | ORG |
TARGET | Widen to account | ACCOUNT |
PIPELINE | Approve as requested | CURRENT |
PIPELINE | Widen to project | PROJECT |
PIPELINE | Widen to org | ORG |
PIPELINE | Widen to account | ACCOUNT |
PROJECT | Approve as requested | CURRENT |
PROJECT | Widen to org | ORG |
PROJECT | Widen to account | ACCOUNT |
There is no pending row that starts at ORG or ACCOUNT — creation cannot request those
scopes (canCreate is false at org/account in sto-core). Do not plan paths like “org → org” or
“org → account” on the Pending queue. ORG / ACCOUNT in the table above are only
body.scope destinations when widening from target, pipeline, or project.
Skip-level elevation: A pending target (or pipeline) row can go to org or account in one call — the user does not need a separate project approval step first unless they ask for project scope explicitly.
Project → project: When the row is already PROJECT and the user wants no widening, use
CURRENT. Do not pass body.scope: "PROJECT" for that — PROJECT on execute means
“promote to project scope” (for target/pipeline pending rows). Plain “approve this
project exemption” → CURRENT.
Not supported (do not offer):
| Request | Why |
|---|---|
| Narrow scope (project → target, org → project, etc.) | Promotion only widens; downscoping is invalid. Pending requests cannot start at org/account. |
Pending row shows ORG or ACCOUNT | Not a normal pending request — already widened or a re-approve case. |
body.scope of TARGET or PIPELINE on execute | MCP preflight rejects these; pending scopes only. Use CURRENT to approve at target/pipeline as requested. |
| Approve at a scope above the user's RBAC | API returns 403; CanApproveFor on the exemption must include the destination scope. |
| Multi-hop in one call beyond one destination | Each execute picks a single destination scope; you cannot pass both ORG and ACCOUNT. |
Org / account execute params: When body.scope is ORG, omit project_id on the execute
call. When body.scope is ACCOUNT, omit both org_id and project_id (MCP preflight
clears them). For CURRENT and PROJECT, keep normal project context.
body.scope| User says (examples) | body.scope | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| "approve", "approve as-is", "at current scope", "this target/pipeline/project" | CURRENT | Approve at the exemption's existing requested scope (no elevation). |
| "approve for project", "project-wide", "elevate to project" | PROJECT | Widen a Target or Pipeline pending exemption to project scope. |
| "approve for org", "org-wide", "organization level", "at org" | ORG | Elevate and approve at organization scope. |
| "approve for account", "account-wide", "account level" | ACCOUNT | Elevate and approve at account scope. |
Default: If the user says plain "approve" with no elevation hint, use CURRENT.
Per-row overrides: In a mixed list, honor each row's stated scope. Row 2 can be ORG while
row 3 is ACCOUNT in the same session.
Optional fields (same for every row unless the user specifies otherwise):
| Field | Notes |
|---|---|
comment | Optional approval note. Users can attach it inline in their selection (5 with comment "JIRA SEC-440") — capture the quoted text verbatim. If they pick a row with no comment phrasing, ask once before executing; never invent text. |
approver_id | Auto-derived from the PAT — never ask the user. |
Do not use harness_execute with action='promote'. The approve action accepts
body.scope and picks /approve vs /promote automatically (CURRENT → approve endpoint;
ORG / ACCOUNT / PROJECT → promote endpoint).
Echo a compact confirmation table before any write:
About to approve N exemption(s):
# | Issue | Pending scope | Approve at | Comment
1 | CVE-2024-1234 in log4j-core | TARGET | CURRENT | —
2 | SQL Injection in api-gateway | PROJECT | ORG | SEC-440
3 | Spring4Shell | PROJECT | ACCOUNT | —
Proceed? (yes/no)Wait for explicit yes (or pass confirm: true on harness_execute only after the user
confirms in clients that cannot elicit interactively).
There is no bulk approve API. Mixed scopes require sequential harness_execute calls —
one per exemption, each with its own body.scope:
harness_execute
resource_type: "security_exemption"
action: "approve"
resource_id: <exemption_id from _action_id_by_row or user>
org_id: <org> # omit org_id/project_id when body.scope is ACCOUNT
project_id: <project> # omit project_id when body.scope is ORG or ACCOUNT
body:
scope: <CURRENT | ORG | ACCOUNT | PROJECT>
comment: "<optional>"After each call, record success or failure. If call 2 of 3 fails, report which succeeded and which failed — do not silently retry with a different scope.
For each approved exemption, return:
scope and the body.scope usedApproved when successful)/ng/account/{accountId}/all/orgs/{org}/projects/{project}/sto/exemptionsIf the user's RBAC does not allow the requested elevation, surface the API error verbatim and
suggest a lower scope (for example CURRENT or PROJECT) or a different approver.
User: "Approve pending exemptions."
harness_list with status: Pending, size: 5, page: 0.total (e.g. "8 pending, showing 1–5")._action_id_by_row[2] and [4], both CURRENT.Do not ask them to open Harness or paste issue names first.
User: "Next page" after seeing rows 1–5 of 12.
_nextPageHint (page: 1, same size: 5)._action_id_by_row for that page's response.User: "Approve pending exemptions" → sees table → "#1, as-is."
scope: TARGET → CURRENT.harness_execute with resource_id from _action_id_by_row[1].User picks row from table: "#1 for the whole project."
scope: TARGET on row 1.body.scope: "PROJECT".User: "#2 for org" (after selecting from surfaced table).
body.scope: "ORG".action: "approve".User: "Approve row 3 for org" from the pending table.
scope: TARGET.body.scope: "ORG" — omit project_id on execute.User: "Approve #1 as-is, #2 for org, and #3 for account." (from the same page table).
CURRENT, ORG, ACCOUNT.User: "Approve #2 for org with comment "AppSec reviewed, JIRA SEC-440" and #4 as-is."
body.scope: "ORG", body.comment: "AppSec reviewed, JIRA SEC-440".body.scope: "CURRENT", no comment.Do not strip or rewrite the quoted comment text.
User: "Show pending log4j exemptions."
search: "log4j", page: 0, size: 5.User: "Reject the XSS exemption."
This skill is for approval. Use harness_execute with action: "reject" and the same
resource_id lookup pattern, or handle via a separate reject workflow if the user insists.
harness_list preview beats asking the user to hunt in the
UI. Default size: 5; paginate with _nextPageHint when they say "next".size constant across pages in a session.high_write with do_not_retry — surface errors to the user instead of
auto-retrying.approver_id is derived once per call from the PAT — no extra user lookup needed.search only when the user narrows — not as a substitute for showing the pending queue.| Symptom | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
security_exemption approve: body.scope is required | body.scope omitted on execute. | Always pass scope; default plain "approve" to CURRENT. |
List error: account scope not supported | resource_scope='account' or 'org' on list. | Remove scope override; list at project. Put ORG/ACCOUNT only on execute body.scope. |
invalid scope 'PIPELINE' or 'TARGET' on approve | body.scope must be CURRENT, PROJECT, ORG, or ACCOUNT. | Approve at target/pipeline as-is → CURRENT. Widen to project → PROJECT. |
| User wants project → project | Already project-scoped; no promotion. | CURRENT, not PROJECT. |
| User wants target → org (or pipeline → account, etc.) | Valid skip-level elevation. | Single execute with ORG or ACCOUNT; do not require an intermediate PROJECT step unless the user asked for project first. |
| 403 on target → account | Missing account-level sto_exemption_approve. | Try CURRENT or PROJECT, or a user with account approve rights. |
| Downscope request (“approve only for this target” on a project pending row) | Cannot narrow on approve. | Explain; they need a new target-scoped exemption request via /exempt-vuln. |
| User says "promote to org" | Same as org-wide approve. | action: "approve", body.scope: "ORG". |
| API 403 / permission denied | PAT user lacks sto_exemption_approve at that elevation scope. | Try CURRENT or ask someone with org/account approve permissions. |
| Row number does not match after pagination | User referred to #3 from an earlier page while you re-listed with different filters. | Re-show the current page table; use absolute row labels (6–10) on page 2+ or re-fetch the page they picked from. |
| User asked to approve but agent skipped the list | Violates list-first workflow. | Always harness_list Pending first; surface numbered table before execute. |
| Agent asked user to copy from Harness UI | Skill requires zero/minimal UI interaction. | List pending exemptions in chat; selection by row number only. |
_action_id_by_row missing an index | Row had no id in the API payload. | Re-list or ask the user for the exemption ID. |
| Exemption not in Pending list | Already approved, rejected, or expired. | List with the appropriate status or explain the current state. |
User expects pending scope: ORG | Requests are only created at project/pipeline/target. | Org/account effect comes from body.scope on approve, not from the create path. |
Agent used security_issue | Wrong resource — issues are vulnerabilities, not exemptions. | Switch to resource_type: "security_exemption". |
e554080
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.