Exempt Vulnerability

Create a security exemption (waiver) for one or more Harness STO vulnerabilities. STO has two places a user can request an exemption from, and each one allows a different set of scopes:

The reason for the difference is simple: rows on the All Issues page are aggregated across executions and don't carry an execution_id, so the backend has no pipeline or target context to attach a narrower scope to. Org- and Account-scoped exemptions are not created here at all; they're produced later by approving an existing exemption at a higher scope (via harness_execute resource_type=security_exemption action=approve body={scope:'ORG'|'ACCOUNT'}), which is outside the scope of this skill.

Instructions

Step 1 — Find out where the user is starting from

Ask the user, in plain language:

Which view are you in? 1. The Vulnerabilities tab for a specific pipeline execution, or 2. The All Issues page (the project-wide baseline view).

>

If you have the URL handy, just paste it — I'll pull out the org, project, and execution from it automatically.

You also need:

• The org and project, unless they're already in session defaults or you can read them from a

pasted URL.

• For the Vulnerabilities tab path: the execution ID, or any Harness URL that contains one.

A pasted Harness UI URL is always the fastest route. The MCP url parameter auto-extracts every identifier in the path, so the user does not have to type anything else. The shapes to recognise:

If the user pastes a Vulnerabilities-tab URL, treat the request as the Vulnerabilities path no matter how they phrased it. If they paste an All Issues URL, do not ask for an execution ID — that view doesn't have one.

Step 2 — List the issues so the user can pick

#### Show a small preview first, not the whole list

Chat is a narrow surface — a 50-row table is unreadable, and the user usually only cares about a handful of issues. Start with a short preview, tell them the total, and let them ask for more or narrow the filter.

The default opening move:

1. Ask harness_list for a small page (10 rows is a good default).
2. From the response, take `total` — the total number of matching issues in the project /

execution — and decide what to show:

• If total ≤ 10, show every row.
• If total > 10, show the first 5 sorted by severity (Critical → High → Medium → Low),

then say something like:

Showing 5 of {total} matching issues, sorted by severity. Tell me how to narrow this — for example: "show 10 mediums", "only SAST", "search log4j", "show all highs" — or pick from the list below.

1. If the user asks for more or narrows the filter, re-call harness_list with the new

filters or a larger page size. Do not paginate manually unless the user asks.

#### Vulnerabilities tab (per-execution)

harness_list
  resource_type: "pipeline_security_issue"
  org_id: <org>
  project_id: <project>
  filters:
    execution_id: <execution_id>           # REQUIRED
    severity_codes: "Critical,High"        # optional, user-driven
    issue_types: "SCA,SAST"                # optional
    search: "<CVE or component>"           # optional
    include_exempted: false                # hide rows that already have an exemption
    page_size_existing: 10                 # small preview — bump only on user request
    page_size_new: 10

The response flattens the existing and new diff partitions into a single items[] and tags each row with _partition. Each row exposes issue_id and targetVariantName (a display string like "nodegoat:master"). It does not expose the raw target_id or pipeline_id — Step 3 covers how to look those up when the user picks a narrower scope.

#### All Issues page (baseline)

harness_list
  resource_type: "security_issue"
  org_id: <org>
  project_id: <project>
  filters:
    severity_codes: "Critical,High"
    issue_types: "SCA,SAST"
    search: "<CVE or component>"
    exemption_statuses: "None"             # hide rows that already have an exemption
    size: 10                               # small preview — bump only on user request

#### The selection prompt

When you ask the user which issues to exempt, always include three things in the same prompt:

1. The total (so they know what they're picking from).
2. How to pick — by row number or by pasting issue IDs.
3. The per-batch limit — the bulk endpoint accepts at most 100 issues per call, so a single

selection cannot exceed that.

Phrase it conversationally, for example:

Which issues would you like to exempt? Pick by number (e.g. 3, 4-7, 3,5,9) or paste issue IDs. You can select up to 100 at a time — that's the per-batch limit for bulk exemptions. If you want more than 100, narrow the filter first or split into multiple batches.

Do not offer "exempt all" as a shortcut. The selection should always be a deliberate list of numbers or IDs — see the 100-issue cap in Step 5b for the full rationale.

Step 3 — Pick the scope

#### From the Vulnerabilities tab

Offer one of:

• This Project — the exemption applies across every pipeline and target in the project.
• This Pipeline — it applies only when this issue shows up in one specific pipeline.
• This Target — it applies only to one repository, container, instance, or configuration.

Two rules the backend enforces, so this skill must enforce them too before calling harness_create:

• target_id and pipeline_id are mutually exclusive on a single exemption. Never send both.
• For Project scope, send neither. The project is already implied by project_id on the request.

pipeline_security_issue rows do not carry target_id or pipeline_id, so you need to resolve them yourself for the narrower scopes. Use the recipes below — do not poke at unrelated endpoints.

##### Resolving pipeline_id

1. If the user pasted a pipeline execution URL, the URL extractor has already given you

pipeline_id. Use it directly — do not look it up again.

1. Otherwise (you only have a raw execution_id), fetch the execution once:

   harness_get
     resource_type: "execution"
     resource_id:   <execution_id>
     org_id:        <org>
     project_id:    <project>

Read pipelineIdentifier off the response.

Never list pipelines and search for a match. The execution-to-pipeline link is 1:1, and the lookup above is constant-time.

##### Resolving target_id

Pull the scan steps for the same execution and build a small lookup map:

# 1. One call returns scanner + target metadata for every step in the execution.
harness_list
  resource_type: "pipeline_security_step"
  org_id: <org>
  project_id: <project>
  filters:
    execution_id: <same execution_id used for the issue list>

# 2. Build a map from the response:
#    key   = "<targetName>:<targetVariant>"   e.g. "nodegoat:master"
#    value = targetId                          (22-character Harness ID)

For each selected issue row, look its targetVariantName up in that map. The matching targetId is what goes into body.target_id (single create) or each item's target_id (bulk create).

The pipeline_security_issue list response also embeds _target_id_lookup_hint and _pipeline_id_lookup_hint fields that describe these same recipes — surface them verbatim to the user if they ask why the extra call is needed.

##### Suggested call order

When the user starts from a URL, the cheapest deterministic plan is:

1. harness_list pipeline_security_issue — always, so the user can pick.
2. harness_list pipeline_security_step — only if This Target scope is in play.
3. harness_get execution — only if This Pipeline scope is in play and you don't already have

pipeline_id from the URL.

1. harness_create security_exemption or security_exemption_bulk.

That's three reads at most, plus one write. Never more.

#### From the All Issues page

The only scope available is This Project. If the user asks for This Pipeline or This Target, explain the limitation and wait for them to choose — don't quietly fall back to Project scope:

The All Issues page doesn't know which execution surfaced this issue, so I can only create a Project-scoped exemption from here. If you need a narrower scope, open the Vulnerabilities tab for a recent execution of the pipeline that scanned this target, send me that URL or execution ID, and I'll scope the exemption to just that pipeline or target.

Step 4 — Collect the exemption fields

requester_id is filled in automatically from the authenticated PAT — never ask the user for it.

If you ever need the full schema, run harness_describe(resource_type="security_exemption"). Do the same if a create call returns a missing-field error.

Step 5 — Confirm, then create (single)

Echo the payload back to the user in plain text before calling harness_create. Use the same shape every time so users learn to scan it quickly:

About to create this exemption:
  Issue:    <id>
  Scope:    This Project | This Pipeline (<pipeline_id>) | This Target (<target_id>)
  Type:     <type>
  Reason:   "<reason>"
  Duration: <n> days
Proceed? (yes/no)

On yes, call:

harness_create
  resource_type: "security_exemption"
  org_id:        <org>
  project_id:    <project>
  body:
    issue_id:      <id>
    type:          <type>
    reason:        <reason>
    duration_days: <n>            # optional
    # exactly one of the next two, or NEITHER for This Project scope:
    pipeline_id:   <pipeline_id>  # This Pipeline scope only
    target_id:     <target_id>    # This Target scope only
    link:          <url>          # optional
    occurrences:   [ids]          # optional
    scan_id:       <scan_id>      # optional, This Target scope only

Step 5b — When the user wants to exempt more than one issue

Pick one of the two paths below and tell the user which one you're taking and why:

Default to bulk when two or more issues share the batch-level fields. This is the common case ("exempt all these Log4j highs"). Per-item scope can still vary — a single bulk call can mix This Project, This Pipeline, and This Target items as long as the type and reason are the same.

Default to single when items have different justifications or types, or when the user explicitly wants per-row tolerance.

##### What's uniform per bulk batch vs what can vary per item

If the user wants different type or reason values per row, bulk cannot encode that — use single creates.

##### The 100-issue cap — never offer "exempt all" without checking

The bulk endpoint accepts at most 100 items per call. The MCP preflight enforces this and will throw items must contain at most 100 entries before the request is sent. Apply these rules:

1. Count before you offer. Always read total from the prior harness_list response. If

total > 100, do not present "exempt all" as a default. Show the count and ask the user to either narrow the filter (severity, scanner, search term, target) or explicitly opt into chunking.

1. Chunk only on explicit opt-in. If the user confirms "yes, exempt all" for more than 100

issues, split the list into chunks of 100 or fewer and send one bulk call per chunk. Each chunk is its own all-or-none transaction — a failed chunk does not roll back successful ones, and a successful chunk does not retry the failed one. Report succeeded / failed counts per chunk in the summary.

1. Never silently truncate. Dropping issues to fit under 100 is a worse outcome than the

API error. Always ask.

1. Refuse vague "all" requests. If the user says "exempt all the highs" without seeing the

count, list the candidates first (page one is enough) and show the total. Wait for them to acknowledge the number before proceeding.

When you select rows for the user, ask them to choose by number or issue ID, not by typing "all". Phrase the prompt as something like:

Which issues would you like to exempt? Pick by number (e.g. 1,3,5-7) or paste issue IDs.

If the user still says "all" and the count is over 100, surface the rule from point 1 above.

##### Bulk call shape

harness_create
  resource_type: "security_exemption_bulk"
  org_id:        <org>
  project_id:    <project>
  body:
    type:          <type>          # applied to every item
    reason:        <reason>        # applied to every item
    duration_days: <n>             # optional, default 30, applied to every item
    link:          <url>           # optional, applied to every item
    items:                         # 1..100 entries
      - issue_id: <id1>
        # per item, optional: target_id XOR pipeline_id, scan_id, occurrences, search
      - issue_id: <id2>
        pipeline_id: <pipeline_id>
      - issue_id: <id3>
        target_id: <target_id>

Per-item rules:

• target_id and pipeline_id are mutually exclusive within a single item.
• From the All Issues page, no item may carry target_id or pipeline_id — the whole batch is

Project-scoped.

• From the Vulnerabilities tab, each item picks its own scope independently.

##### Reading the bulk response

The response carries a top-level status banner. Surface it verbatim and react accordingly:

Typical causes of ALL_FAILED are: an unknown issue_id, no scan found for the issue within the project scope, a mutual-exclusion slip, or a duplicate exemption. results[0].error names the actual cause.

If a single bad item is poisoning a large batch and the user wants to know which one, you may fall back to single creates to isolate it — but ask first; don't switch strategies silently.

Step 6 — Report what happened

For each created exemption, return:

• exemption_id
• status — this will be Pending until someone with the right permissions approves it.

Approval is a separate workflow and is outside the scope of this skill.

• A deep link to the project's Exemptions page:

/ng/account/{accountId}/all/orgs/{org}/projects/{project}/sto/exemptions

If any create call failed, surface the API error verbatim — it's almost always a mutual-exclusion violation or a missing field, and the message tells the user exactly what to fix.

Examples

Example 1 — One CVE, This Pipeline scope, from a specific execution

User: "Exempt CVE-2024-1234 from execution `ehsPKtczTRO5CUDAt-NR` for that pipeline only. False positive — already patched in our fork."

1. Confirm org and project from session defaults.
2. harness_list pipeline_security_issue with execution_id and search: "CVE-2024-1234".
3. Pick the matching row and note its issue_id.
4. Resolve pipeline_id — either from the pasted URL, or via harness_get execution.
5. Echo the confirmation block, wait for yes, then harness_create with

body: { issue_id, type: "False Positive", reason: "Patched in our fork — see PR #422", pipeline_id }.

Example 2 — Three Log4j highs from the All Issues page, This Project scope, bulk

User: "From the All Issues page, suppress these three high-severity Log4j findings for 90 days. Acceptable risk — we've mitigated at the gateway."

1. harness_list security_issue with severity_codes: "High", search: "log4j".
2. User picks three issue_ids.
3. All Issues path → This Project scope (no target_id or pipeline_id on any item).
4. All three share batch-level fields → bulk.
5. One harness_create resource_type=security_exemption_bulk with

body: { type: "Acceptable Risk", reason: "Mitigated at API gateway WAF — ticket SEC-880", duration_days: 90, items: [{issue_id:"i1"}, {issue_id:"i2"}, {issue_id:"i3"}] }.

1. Expect status: ALL_SUCCEEDED; report the three returned exemption IDs.

Example 2b — Mixed-scope bulk from the Vulnerabilities tab

User: "From execution `ehsPKtczTRO5CUDAt-NR`, exempt these five Critical issues — the first two for the whole project, the next two only on this pipeline, the last one only on the `api-gateway` target. False positive across the board."

1. harness_list pipeline_security_issue with execution_id and severity_codes: "Critical".
2. harness_list pipeline_security_step (same execution) to resolve target_id for the

api-gateway row.

1. User picks the five rows.
2. One bulk call — all five share type and reason, and per-item scope is encoded per row:

   harness_create resource_type=security_exemption_bulk body:
     type: "False Positive"
     reason: "False positive — see triage doc #441"
     items:
       - { issue_id: i1 }                              # This Project
       - { issue_id: i2 }                              # This Project
       - { issue_id: i3, pipeline_id: <pipelineId> }   # This Pipeline
       - { issue_id: i4, pipeline_id: <pipelineId> }   # This Pipeline
       - { issue_id: i5, target_id:   <targetId> }     # This Target

Example 2c — Two CVEs with different exemption types

User: "Exempt these two CVEs — the Log4j one is a False Positive, the Spring4Shell one is Acceptable Risk."

The two items need different type values, which bulk cannot encode. Use the single path: two sequential harness_create resource_type=security_exemption calls. Splitting into two batches of one is just the single path with extra ceremony.

Example 3 — User asks for This Target scope from the All Issues page

User: "From the All Issues page, exempt this XSS finding for the `web-frontend` target only."

Don't quietly downgrade. Say:

The All Issues page doesn't know which execution found this issue, so I can only create a Project-scoped exemption from here. Two options: 1. Create it as a This Project exemption now, or 2. Open the Vulnerabilities tab for a recent execution that scanned web-frontend, send me that URL or execution ID, and I'll scope it to just that target.

Example 4 — Mutual-exclusion error recovery

If the user supplies both pipeline_id and target_id for the same exemption, push back before calling the API:

An exemption can be scoped to one pipeline or one target, not both. Pick one: This Pipeline applies across every target this pipeline scans, while This Target applies across every pipeline that scans this target.

Performance Notes

• pipeline_security_issue uses diff pagination — page_existing / page_size_existing and

page_new / page_size_new are independent counters. Open with a small preview (10 of each) and only bump the size when the user asks for more or narrows the filter. The response always reports the partition-aware total, so you can show "5 of 19" without paging further.

• security_issue uses standard pagination (page / size). Same pattern — start with `size:

10, surface total`, expand on request.

• Filter out already-exempted noise up front: pass include_exempted: false on

pipeline_security_issue, or exemption_statuses: "None" on security_issue.

• Single create is one POST per issue. The MCP server marks it as

risk: high_write, retryPolicy: do_not_retry — surface failures to the user instead of auto-retrying.

• Bulk create is one POST for up to 100 items, producing one database transaction and one audit

row. At 100 items, that's roughly 5 DB round-trips vs ~400 with a loop of singles (see sto-core/docs/STO-8977-bulk-exemption-api.md). Prefer bulk whenever two or more items share the batch-level fields.

• Bulk is all-or-none. Never retry only the failed rows from an ALL_FAILED or

MIXED_UNEXPECTED response — resubmit the full corrected list instead.

Troubleshooting