Build agents usecase #3 AntiGravity, Kiro and IBM Bob to build a Context based SecOps MCP

VaranAwesomenow
Mega Sage

Use AntiGravity to understand ServiceNow SecOps Configuration Compliance process guide, it has generated below rdf once I rendered this in IBM ICA Context studio it created following 

 

VaranAwesomenow_0-1779552474622.png

 

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
         xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"
         xmlns:cc="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#">

    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc">
        <rdfs:label>ServiceNow Configuration Compliance Schema</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>Schema for ServiceNow SecOps Configuration Compliance generated for IBM ICA based on the Process Guide.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Ontology>

    <!-- Core Entities -->
    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationItem">
        <rdfs:label>Configuration Item (CI)</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>A logical or physical resource in the ServiceNow CMDB. Contains supporting information like ownership and relationships to other CIs.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationTest">
        <rdfs:label>Configuration Test</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>A mechanism to check asset compliance against policies or specific technical controls.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#TestResult">
        <rdfs:label>Test Result</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>Represents the status of the latest execution of a Configuration test on a Configuration Item (CI + Configuration Test = Test Result).</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#RemediationTask">
        <rdfs:label>Remediation Task</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>A single unit of work representing a collection of similar Test Results, previously known as a Test Result Group.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <!-- Policy & Governance -->
    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Policy">
        <rdfs:label>Policy</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>Defines how a class of technology assets should be governed.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Control">
        <rdfs:label>GRC Control</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>Internal Policy Statements from ServiceNow GRC Policy and Compliance that define a Control applied to the assets.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#AuthoritativeSource">
        <rdfs:label>Authoritative Source</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>References to information about known software and hardware configuration issues defining security requirements.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Citation">
        <rdfs:label>Citation</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>Specific mandates that link tests to authoritative sources.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <!-- Roles & Responsibilities -->
    <owl:Class rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Role">
        <rdfs:label>Role</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment>Roles defined in the Configuration Compliance process.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:Class>

    <!-- Object Properties (Relationships) -->
    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#hasTest">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#TestResult"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationTest"/>
    </owl:ObjectProperty>

    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#hasCI">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#TestResult"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationItem"/>
    </owl:ObjectProperty>

    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#groupedInto">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#TestResult"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#RemediationTask"/>
    </owl:ObjectProperty>

    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#testsComplianceOf">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationTest"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Control"/>
    </owl:ObjectProperty>

    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#belongsToPolicy">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationTest"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Policy"/>
    </owl:ObjectProperty>

    <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#hasCitation">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#ConfigurationTest"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#Citation"/>
    </owl:ObjectProperty>

    <!-- Datatype Properties (Attributes) -->
    <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#riskScore">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#TestResult"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"/>
        <rdfs:comment>Score from 0 to 100 based on criticality and asset exposure.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:DatatypeProperty>

    <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#riskRating">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#TestResult"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/>
        <rdfs:comment>Values include: Critical, High, Medium, Low, None.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:DatatypeProperty>

    <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#targetRemediationDate">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#RemediationTask"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime"/>
    </owl:DatatypeProperty>

    <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#state">
        <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="http://ibm.com/ica/secops/cc#RemediationTask"/>
        <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/>
        <rdfs:comment>States: Open, Under Investigation, Awaiting Implementation, Deferred, Resolved, In Review, Closed.</rdfs:comment>
    </owl:DatatypeProperty>

</rdf:RDF>

 Complete knowledge graph post uploading of CC process guide

VaranAwesomenow_1-1779553192119.png

 

Example prompts and response

Can you create a simple business requirements to implement waiver process for configuration compliance test results
 
 
 

I'll query the context to understand the current Configuration Compliance process, then create business requirements for implementing a waiver process.

I want to use a tool on the context-studio MCP server:
context-studio
 
Completed
context-broker-hybrid-query
 
Combines semantic similarity and graph relationships for comprehensive context retrieval
"{\n  \"context_id\": \"ctx_be0894ff1ef4\",\n  \"AgentPersona\": \"ServiceNow Business Analyst\",\n  \"query\": \"What is the current process for handling configuration compliance test results, remediation tasks, and exceptions or waivers?\",\n  \"sources\": [\"graph\", \"vector\"],\n  \"vector_params\": {\n    \"top_k\": 10\n  },\n  \"graph_params\": {\n    \"max_depth\": 1,\n    \"limit\": 5\n  }\n}"
 

I'll now query for more specific information about exception handling, risk management, and approval processes to inform the waiver requirements.

I want to use a tool on the context-studio MCP server:
context-studio
 
Completed
context-broker-hybrid-query
Combines semantic similarity and graph relationships for comprehensive context retrieval
 
"{\n  \"context_id\": \"ctx_be0894ff1ef4\",\n  \"AgentPersona\": \"ServiceNow Business Analyst\",\n  \"query\": \"What are the approval processes, state transitions, lifecycle management, and risk scoring mechanisms for test results and remediation tasks? How are exceptions or non-active states handled?\",\n  \"sources\": [\"graph\", \"vector\"],\n  \"vector_params\": {\n    \"top_k\": 8\n  },\n  \"graph_params\": {\n    \"max_depth\": 1,\n    \"limit\": 5\n  }\n}"

Created business requirements for Configuration Compliance waiver process including:

  • Scope Card: Waiver requests for test results with approval workflow, 6 in-scope items, 4 out-of-scope
  • Process Flow: Current 4-step vs. future 8-step waiver workflow
  • Roadmap: Now (MVP in 6-8 weeks), Next (bulk + notifications), Later (GRC integration)
  • 5 User Stories: Request waiver, approve/reject, track waivers, handle expiration, reporting - each with 3-5 acceptance criteria
  • Dependencies: 4 technical, 3 risks with mitigations, 4 open questions
  • Success Metrics: Primary (30% reduction in aged items), 2 secondary, 1 guardrail
  • ServiceNow Details: New waiver table, modified Test Result states, roles, Flow Designer workflow, UI actions, notifications

Ready for stakeholder review and MVP scope approval decision.


2 REPLIES 2

VaranAwesomenow
Mega Sage

another example context for vulnerability management app schema

VaranAwesomenow_0-1779555627163.png

 

VaranAwesomenow
Mega Sage

Response to another prompt.
ServiceNow Configuration Compliance **already includes OOB waiver/exception capabilities**:

**OOB Features Available Now:**
- "Request Exception" UI action with reason, expiration date
- "Deferred" state with 5 substates (Risk Accepted, Fix Unavailable, Mitigating Control in Place, Awaiting Maintenance Window, Other)
- Approval workflow via "In Review" state
- Auto-reopen on expiration
- Configuration Compliance Process Owner approval role
- Basic reporting/filtering

**Recommended Approach: Option B (OOB + Light Enhancements)**
- Use OOB exception process as-is (zero custom development)
- Add 3 enhancements: automated expiration notifications (Flow), waiver metrics dashboard (Report), required compensating controls for High/Critical (Business Rule)
- Timeline: 3-4 weeks vs. 6-8 weeks for custom build
- Fully supported, minimal maintenance

**Key Gap Addressed:** OOB handles 90% of requirements; enhancements add automated notifications and better metrics without rebuilding existing functionality.