L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Productivité · SKILL.md

postmortem-authoring

postmortem-authoring

Authors blameless incident and defect postmortems with timeline, impact, root cause, and corrective actions. Use after incidents or for formal defect write-ups.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: postmortem-authoring description: Authors blameless incident and defect postmortems with timeline, impact, root cause, and corrective actions. Use after incidents or for formal defect write-ups.

Postmortem authoring

Purpose

Produce a blameless, evidence-based postmortem suitable for stakeholders and future search—grounded in logs, deploys, and metrics, not speculation.

When to Use

  • User asks for incident postmortem, RCA document, or defect write-up.
  • After mitigation when timeline and impact need formal capture.
  • Publishing to docs/tickets via google-docs, github, or jira.

When NOT to Use

  • Active incident command → lead-incidents, coordinate-incidents first.
  • Threat design review → threat-modeling.
  • Skill repo authoring → create-skill / publish-skill.

Expected Outcome

  • Complete postmortem draft with required sections and explicit unknowns.
  • Corrective actions with owners and dates when provided.
  • UTC timeline aligned to evidence sources.

Inputs to Gather

  • Incident window (UTC), severity, and services affected.
  • Alerts, deploys, feature flags, and key log/metric links.
  • Customer/revenue/SLO impact estimates.
  • Existing tickets or chat threads.

Workflow

  1. Collect evidence (alerts, deploys, dashboards) before drafting narrative.
  2. Build UTC timeline with source citations.
  3. Draft sections below; mark gaps as unknown.
  4. Separate proximate vs contributing causes without blaming individuals.
  5. Propose corrective actions (quick wins + systemic); request owners/dates.
  6. Review for blameless language and sensitive data redaction.

Domain guidance

Produce a blameless document suitable for stakeholders and future search.

Sections

  1. Summary — what broke, for whom, how long.
  2. Timeline — evidence-based (logs, deploys, alerts), UTC.
  3. Impact — users, revenue, SLOs, data.
  4. Root cause — mechanism, not individuals; proximate vs contributing.
  5. Detection — why it was not caught earlier.
  6. Mitigation — what stopped the bleeding.
  7. Corrective actions — owned, dated; quick wins and systemic fixes.

Stay factual; mark unknowns explicitly.

Tool Availability Rules

AccessBehavior
Full tool accessPull evidence from connected tools; publish doc if asked.
Read-onlyDraft from user-provided evidence only.
No integrationDraft structure; user supplies links and timestamps.

Related tool sets

  • jira
  • github
  • google-docs

Review / Decision / Execution Criteria

  • Every timeline entry traceable to a source.
  • Corrective actions are SMART where possible.
  • No naming individuals as root cause.

Output Format

Markdown or doc-ready sections per template above, plus optional one-paragraph executive summary.

Quality Bar

  • Suitable for exec + engineering audiences.
  • Distinguishes facts, hypotheses, and unknowns.

Safety and Boundaries

  • Redact customer PII and secrets from excerpts.
  • Do not fabricate deploy times or metric values.

Escalation / Dispatch Rules

  • SLO policy implications → error-budget-management.
  • Ongoing reliability work → monitor-slos.

References

  • skills/old_skills.json (postmortem-authoring).
  • skills/skill.instruction.md, skills/meta.instructions.md
Skills enregistrées