building-incident-response-playbook
Designs and documents structured incident response playbooks that define step-by-step procedures for specific incident types aligned with NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks. Covers playbook structure, decision trees, escalation criteria, RACI matrices, and integration with SOAR platforms. Activates for requests involving IR playbook creation, incident response procedure documentation, response runbook development, or SOAR playbook design.
Works with
0
total installs
0
this week
8.6K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Install Skill
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
8.6K
stars
Installation Guide
How to use building-incident-response-playbook on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your machine
- ›Node.js 16+ with npm — verify with
node --version - ›Active project directory where you want to add
building-incident-response-playbook
Run the install command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches building-incident-response-playbook from mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate building-incident-response-playbook. Access via /building-incident-response-playbook in your agent's command palette.
Security Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Documentation
| name | building-incident-response-playbook |
| description | 'Designs and documents structured incident response playbooks that define step-by-step procedures for specific incident types aligned with NIST SP 800-61r3 and SANS PICERL frameworks. Covers playbook structure, decision trees, escalation criteria, RACI matrices, and integration with SOAR platforms. Activates for requests involving IR playbook creation, incident response procedure documentation, response runbook development, or SOAR playbook design. ' |
| domain | cybersecurity |
| subdomain | incident-response |
| tags | - IR-playbook - runbook - NIST-800-61 - SOAR-integration - response-procedures |
| mitre_attack | - T1190 - T1566 - T1078 |
| version | 1.0.0 |
| author | mahipal |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| nist_csf | - RS.MA-01 - RS.MA-02 - RS.AN-03 - RC.RP-01 |
Building Incident Response Playbooks
When to Use
- Establishing or maturing an incident response program from scratch
- Documenting procedures for a new incident type after a novel attack
- Automating response workflows in a SOAR platform (Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR)
- Preparing for compliance audits requiring documented IR procedures (SOC 2, PCI-DSS, HIPAA)
- Conducting a gap analysis of existing IR capabilities against specific threat scenarios
Do not use for one-time ad hoc investigations; playbooks are reusable procedure documents, not case-specific reports.
Prerequisites
- Organizational risk assessment identifying top incident scenarios by likelihood and impact
- NIST SP 800-61r3 or SANS PICERL framework adopted as the organizational IR standard
- Asset inventory with business criticality ratings and data classification
- RACI chart defining roles: Incident Commander, SOC analysts, system administrators, legal, communications
- Existing detection capabilities inventory (SIEM rules, EDR detections, IDS signatures)
- SOAR platform access if building automated playbooks
Workflow
Step 1: Select and Scope the Incident Type
Define the specific scenario the playbook will address:
- Identify the top incident types based on organizational risk assessment and historical data
- Scope each playbook to a single incident type for clarity (do not combine unrelated scenarios)
- Define trigger conditions that activate the playbook
Common playbook types:
Priority Playbooks (build first):
1. Ransomware incident response
2. Phishing/credential compromise
3. Business email compromise
4. Malware infection
5. Data breach/exfiltration
6. DDoS attack
7. Insider threat
8. Account takeover
9. Web application compromise
10. Cloud infrastructure compromise
Step 2: Define the Playbook Structure
Every playbook should follow a consistent structure:
PLAYBOOK TEMPLATE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1. Playbook Metadata
- Name, version, owner, last review date
- Trigger conditions
- Severity criteria
2. RACI Matrix
- Who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed for each step
3. Detection & Triage
- How the incident is detected
- Initial triage checklist
- Severity classification criteria
4. Containment
- Short-term containment actions
- Long-term containment actions
- Evidence preservation requirements
5. Eradication
- Root cause identification
- Malware/threat removal steps
- Verification procedures
6. Recovery
- System restoration steps
- Validation criteria
- Monitoring requirements post-recovery
7. Post-Incident
- Lessons learned meeting trigger
- Report template
- Detection improvement actions
8. Communication
- Internal notification matrix
- External notification requirements (regulators, customers, law enforcement)
- Status update cadence
9. Appendices
- Tool-specific procedures
- Contact lists
- Evidence collection checklists
Step 3: Write Decision Trees and Escalation Criteria
Define clear decision points with binary outcomes:
Detection Alert Received
├── Is the alert a true positive?
│ ├── YES → Classify severity
│ │ ├── P1 (Critical) → Page incident commander, begin containment immediately
│ │ ├── P2 (High) → Notify IR lead, begin investigation within 30 min
│ │ ├── P3 (Medium) → Queue for investigation within 4 hours
│ │ └── P4 (Low) → Document and investigate within 24 hours
│ └── NO → Document as false positive, tune detection rule
└── Cannot determine → Escalate to Tier 2 for deeper analysis
Escalation triggers:
- Any P1 incident: Immediate escalation to IR lead and CISO
- Data exfiltration confirmed: Legal counsel and privacy officer notified
- Customer data involved: Customer notification process activated
- Third-party involvement: Vendor security contact engaged
- Law enforcement needed: General counsel authorizes before contact
Step 4: Define Specific Technical Procedures
Write tool-specific instructions for each step (not generic guidance):
CONTAINMENT - Endpoint Isolation via CrowdStrike:
1. Open Falcon Console > Hosts > Search for affected hostname
2. Click on the host > Host Details
3. Click "Contain Host" button in upper right
4. Confirm isolation (host will only communicate with CrowdStrike cloud)
5. Document containment action in incident ticket with timestamp
6. Verify containment: Host should show "Contained" status badge
CONTAINMENT - Block C2 Domain at DNS:
1. SSH to DNS server: ssh [email protected]
2. Add to block zone: echo "zone evil.com { type master; file /etc/bind/db.sinkhole; };" >> /etc/bind/named.conf.local
3. Reload DNS: rndc reload
4. Verify: dig @dns-primary evil.com (should resolve to sinkhole IP 10.0.0.99)
5. Document blocked domain in incident ticket
Step 5: Integrate with SOAR Platform
Convert manual playbook steps into automated workflows:
- Map each playbook step to a SOAR action (API call, script, human decision point)
- Define automation boundaries (what runs automatically vs. what requires analyst approval)
- Build enrichment automations for the triage phase
- Create containment automations with approval gates for high-impact actions
- Configure notification automations for stakeholder communication
Step 6: Test and Maintain the Playbook
Validate the playbook through exercises and maintain currency:
- Conduct tabletop exercises with the IR team walking through the playbook
- Perform live-fire exercises simulating the incident type in a test environment
- Review and update after every real incident that uses the playbook
- Schedule quarterly reviews for accuracy of contact lists, tool procedures, and escalation paths
- Track playbook metrics: mean time to contain, mean time to resolve, false positive rate
Key Concepts
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Playbook | Documented, repeatable set of procedures for responding to a specific incident type |
| Runbook | More granular than a playbook; step-by-step technical instructions for a specific task within a playbook |
| RACI Matrix | Responsibility assignment chart defining who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed for each activity |
| Decision Tree | Flowchart-based logic defining the response path based on binary conditions at each decision point |
| Escalation Criteria | Predefined conditions that trigger notification of higher-level personnel or external parties |
| SOAR Playbook | Automated workflow in a Security Orchestration, Automation, and Response platform executing playbook steps |
Tools & Systems
- Cortex XSOAR: SOAR platform with visual playbook editor, 700+ integrations, and collaborative War Room
- Splunk SOAR: SOAR platform integrated with Splunk ES, drag-and-drop playbook builder with 2,800+ automated actions
- TheHive: Open-source incident response platform with case templates that function as playbook frameworks
- Confluence / GitLab Wiki: Documentation platforms for maintaining human-readable playbook documents with version control
- Tines: No-code security automation platform for building playbook workflows without programming
Common Scenarios
Scenario: Building a Phishing Response Playbook from Scratch
Context: An organization with a 5-person SOC has no documented phishing response procedure. Analysts handle phishing reports inconsistently.
Approach:
- Interview SOC analysts to document their current ad hoc process
- Define the trigger: user reports phishing email via abuse@ mailbox or phishing button
- Write triage steps: extract email headers, check sender reputation, analyze URLs/attachments in sandbox
- Define containment: quarantine email from all mailboxes, block sender domain, reset passwords if credentials entered
- Build SOAR automation: auto-extract IOCs from reported email, enrich via VirusTotal, create case in TheHive
- Test with simulated phishing email and measure response time improvement
Pitfalls:
- Writing overly generic procedures that don't reference specific tool interfaces or commands
- Not including the communication plan for notifying users who received the phishing email
- Forgetting to define the criteria for when a phishing report becomes a full incident investigation
- Not versioning the playbook or scheduling regular review cycles
Output Format
INCIDENT RESPONSE PLAYBOOK
============================
Playbook Name: Phishing Incident Response
Version: 2.1
Owner: SOC Manager
Last Reviewed: 2025-11-01
Next Review: 2026-02-01
Trigger: Phishing email reported via [email protected] or phish button
RACI MATRIX
Activity | SOC L1 | SOC L2 | IR Lead | Legal | Comms
Initial Triage | R | C | I | |
Email Analysis | R | A | I | |
Containment | | R | A | I |
Credential Reset | | R | A | |
User Notification | | C | A | | R
Regulatory Notification | | | C | R | A
Lessons Learned | C | C | R | I | I
PROCEDURE STEPS
[Detailed steps with tool-specific instructions]
DECISION TREE
[Flowchart logic]
ESCALATION MATRIX
[Conditions and contacts]
METRICS
Target MTTA: 15 minutes
Target MTTC: 1 hour
Target MTTR: 4 hours
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases
Task Automation & Efficiency
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Knowledge Enhancement
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Quality Improvement
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Implementation Guide
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
- 1Install skill using provided installation command
- 2Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Related Skills
performing-cryptographic-audit-of-application
5mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
exploiting-deeplink-vulnerabilities
3mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
implementing-soar-playbook-with-palo-alto-xsoar
3mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
analyzing-network-traffic-with-wireshark
2mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
scanning-docker-images-with-trivy
2mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
generating-threat-intelligence-reports
2mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
Reviews
- AAdvait Okafor★★★★★Dec 24, 2024
building-incident-response-playbook has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- HHarper Smith★★★★★Dec 20, 2024
Registry listing for building-incident-response-playbook matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- MMin Khan★★★★★Dec 20, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: building-incident-response-playbook is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- DDhruvi Jain★★★★★Dec 12, 2024
Useful defaults in building-incident-response-playbook — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- NNaina Haddad★★★★★Nov 23, 2024
building-incident-response-playbook reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- HHarper Ghosh★★★★★Nov 15, 2024
building-incident-response-playbook fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- JJin Martinez★★★★★Nov 11, 2024
We added building-incident-response-playbook from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- OOshnikdeep★★★★★Nov 3, 2024
building-incident-response-playbook is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- GGanesh Mohane★★★★★Oct 22, 2024
Keeps context tight: building-incident-response-playbook is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- NNaina Lopez★★★★★Oct 14, 2024
Registry listing for building-incident-response-playbook matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
showing 1-10 of 41
Discussion
Comments — not star reviews- No comments yet — start the thread.