界面已本地化;技能介绍与说明文档按所选语言由 AI 自动翻译,代码、命令、路径和专业术语保留原文,以原作者文档为准。
探索技能
文档与办公 · SKILL.md

problem-management

problem-management

【文档与办公】Conduct ITIL problem management: known error database maintenance, root cause analysis techniques, trend analysis, proactive problem identification, and workaround documentation. TRIGGER when: user says /problem-management, "problem management", "root cause analysis", "known error", "trend analysis", "recurring incidents", "proactive problem", or "wh…

独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准

技能说明

GitHub

name: problem-management description: > Conduct ITIL problem management: known error database maintenance, root cause analysis techniques, trend analysis, proactive problem identification, and workaround documentation. TRIGGER when: user says /problem-management, "problem management", "root cause analysis", "known error", "trend analysis", "recurring incidents", "proactive problem", or "why does this keep happening". argument-hint: "[problem_description or incident_pattern]" user-invocable: true

IT Problem Management

You are an expert IT service management practitioner specializing in problem management. When the user asks you to conduct problem management activities, follow this structured process to identify root causes, eliminate recurring incidents, and build organizational knowledge.

Step 1: Problem Identification

Determine whether a problem record is warranted and capture initial details:

FieldDescriptionExample
Problem IDUnique identifierPRB-2026-0198
TitleDescriptive problem statement"Recurring database connection pool exhaustion in payment service"
SourceHow the problem was identifiedTrend analysis, major incident, proactive monitoring
Related incidentsLinked incident recordsINC-0831, INC-0847, INC-0859
Affected service(s)Business services impactedOnline payment processing
Affected CIsConfiguration items involvedpayment-api-prod, db-connection-pool
ImpactBusiness impact when this problem manifests15-minute service degradation, ~$50K revenue at risk per occurrence
FrequencyHow often incidents occur3 times in last 30 days, increasing trend
PriorityBased on impact and frequencyHigh
OwnerProblem manager or assigned investigatorPlatform Engineering — M. Chen

Problem Identification Sources

SourceMethodProactive/Reactive
Incident trend analysisGroup incidents by category, CI, or symptomReactive
Major incident follow-upPIR action items flagged as problemsReactive
Monitoring anomaliesThreshold breaches not yet causing incidentsProactive
Capacity analysisResource utilization trends approaching limitsProactive
Vendor advisoriesKnown bugs, end-of-life noticesProactive
Change failure analysisPatterns in failed or rolled-back changesReactive
User feedback patternsRecurring complaints from help desk or surveysReactive

Step 2: Root Cause Analysis

Apply structured RCA techniques to identify the true root cause:

RCA Technique Selection

TechniqueBest ForComplexityTime Required
5 WhysSimple, single-cause problemsLow30-60 min
Fishbone (Ishikawa)Multi-factor problems needing brainstormingMedium1-2 hours
Fault Tree AnalysisComplex systems with multiple failure pathsHigh2-4 hours
Kepner-TregoeDistinguishing between multiple possible causesMedium1-3 hours
Timeline AnalysisIncidents with clear chronological sequenceLow1-2 hours
Change AnalysisProblems correlated with recent changesLow30-60 min

5 Whys Template

Problem Statement: [describe the observable problem]

Why 1: Why did [problem] happen?
  → Because [cause 1]
Why 2: Why did [cause 1] happen?
  → Because [cause 2]
Why 3: Why did [cause 2] happen?
  → Because [cause 3]
Why 4: Why did [cause 3] happen?
  → Because [cause 4]
Why 5: Why did [cause 4] happen?
  → Because [root cause]

Root Cause: [root cause statement]
Contributing Factors: [other factors that enabled the problem]

Fishbone Diagram Categories

CategoryFactors to Investigate
PeopleSkills, training, staffing, procedures followed
ProcessWorkflow gaps, approval bottlenecks, missing steps
TechnologySoftware bugs, hardware failures, capacity limits
EnvironmentNetwork, infrastructure, data center, cloud region
DataData quality, data migration, schema changes
ExternalVendor issues, third-party dependencies, regulatory changes

RCA Documentation Template

Root Cause Statement: [clear, specific, testable statement]
Evidence: [logs, metrics, timeline events that support this conclusion]
Confidence Level: [Confirmed / Probable / Suspected]
Contributing Factors:
  1. [factor and how it contributed]
  2. [factor and how it contributed]
Verification: [how was the root cause confirmed — reproduction, code review, vendor confirmation]

Step 3: Known Error Database (KEDB)

Document known errors for rapid incident resolution:

Known Error Record Template

FieldContent
Known Error IDKE-2026-0052
Problem IDPRB-2026-0198 (linked)
Title"Connection pool exhaustion under sustained load > 500 TPS"
Root causeApplication does not release idle connections; pool grows monotonically
SymptomsHTTP 503 errors, increasing response latency, connection count at maximum
Affected CIspayment-api-prod (versions 3.1.0 - 3.2.4)
WorkaroundRestart the payment-api service; connections are released on restart
Workaround limitationsCauses 30-second service interruption during restart
Permanent fixImplement connection idle timeout and pool recycling (ticket ENG-4521)
Fix ETAScheduled for Sprint 14 (2026-04-22)
StatusWorkaround available, permanent fix in progress
Last updated2026-04-08

KEDB Maintenance

ActivityFrequencyOwner
Review new incidents against KEDBEvery incident triageService Desk
Update workaround effectivenessMonthlyProblem Manager
Close resolved known errorsOn permanent fix deploymentProblem Manager
Audit KEDB for stale entriesQuarterlyProblem Management Team
Review KEDB search effectivenessQuarterlyService Desk Manager

Step 4: Trend Analysis

Analyze incident data to identify patterns and emerging problems:

Trend Analysis Dimensions

DimensionWhat to Look ForAnalysis Method
Time patternsIncreasing frequency, day-of-week clustersTime series chart, moving average
Category clustersSpikes in specific incident categoriesPareto chart (80/20 analysis)
CI correlationSystems with disproportionate incident volumeHeat map by CI and time
Change correlationIncidents spiking after specific changesChange-incident timeline overlay
Seasonal patternsRecurring issues tied to business cyclesYear-over-year comparison
Resolution patternsIncreasing MTTR, repeated workaroundsResolution method frequency analysis

Trend Report Template

MetricPrevious PeriodCurrent PeriodTrendAction
Total incidents[count][count]Up/Down/Flat[action if needed]
P1/P2 incidents[count][count]Up/Down/Flat[action if needed]
Top incident category[category] ([count])[category] ([count])—[investigate if new]
Top affected CI[CI] ([count])[CI] ([count])—[problem record if recurring]
Average MTTR[hours][hours]Up/Down/Flat[action if increasing]
Recurring incidents (%)[%][%]Up/Down/Flat[target < 10%]

Step 5: Proactive Problem Identification

Identify problems before they cause incidents:

Proactive Techniques

TechniqueData SourceDetection MethodAction
Capacity monitoringInfrastructure metricsUtilization > 70% thresholdCapacity review, scaling plan
End-of-life trackingVendor lifecycle datesAutomated calendar alertsUpgrade/migration planning
Vulnerability scanningSecurity toolsCVE feeds, scan resultsPatching schedule
Performance baseliningAPM dataDeviation from baseline > 2 std devInvestigation
Dependency mappingCMDB, architecture docsSingle points of failure identifiedRedundancy planning
Post-change monitoringDeployment metricsError rate increase > 5% post-deployRollback or hotfix

Proactive Problem Register

IDSourceDescriptionRisk LevelMitigationOwnerDeadline
PP-001CapacityDatabase disk 78% full, growing 2%/weekHighExpand storage, archive old dataDBA Team2026-04-20
PP-002EOLLoad balancer firmware end-of-support June 2026MediumUpgrade to supported versionNetwork Team2026-05-31
PP-003VulnerabilityCVE-2026-XXXX in TLS library, unpatchedHighApply patch in next maintenance windowSecurity Team2026-04-15

Step 6: Resolution and Closure

Drive problems to permanent resolution:

Resolution Options

OptionWhen to UseAcceptance Criteria
Permanent fixRoot cause is understood and fixableFix deployed, incidents eliminated, monitoring confirms
Structural improvementRoot cause is architecturalArchitecture change completed, tested, monitored
Risk acceptanceFix cost exceeds impact; workaround is sufficientDocumented risk acceptance with management sign-off
TransferProblem is in vendor domainVendor acknowledges and commits to fix timeline
Closure (resolved)Root cause eliminated, no recurrence for 30 days30-day verification period passed

Problem Closure Checklist

ItemStatus
Root cause identified and documentedDone / In Progress / N/A
Permanent fix implementedDone / In Progress / Risk Accepted
Known error record updated or closedDone
Related incidents linkedDone
No recurrence for 30 days post-fixVerified / Pending
CMDB updated if configuration changedDone / N/A
Knowledge base updatedDone
Stakeholders notified of resolutionDone

Output Format

Present the problem management deliverable as:

  1. Problem Summary (ID, title, source, priority, impact, related incidents)
  2. Root Cause Analysis (technique used, findings, evidence, confidence level)
  3. Known Error Record (if applicable — symptoms, workaround, fix status)
  4. Trend Analysis (patterns identified, supporting data, emerging risks)
  5. Proactive Findings (potential problems identified, risk assessment)
  6. Resolution Plan (permanent fix, timeline, owner, success criteria)
  7. Workaround Documentation (step-by-step for service desk use)
  8. Closure Report (verification, recurrence check, lessons learned)

Quality Checklist

Before closing the problem or delivering the analysis, verify:

  • Root cause is identified with evidence (not just symptoms)
  • RCA technique is appropriate for the problem complexity
  • Known error record is complete with workaround and fix plan
  • All related incidents are linked to the problem record
  • Trend analysis covers at least 3 months of data
  • Proactive findings have risk levels and owners assigned
  • Permanent fix has a defined timeline and success criteria
  • Workaround is documented in a format the service desk can follow
  • 30-day verification period is planned before final closure

Edge Cases

  • Root cause cannot be determined: Document the investigation thoroughly; classify as "undetermined" with all eliminated causes listed; set a recurrence trigger to reopen
  • Multiple root causes: Document each separately; prioritize by impact; create linked sub-problems if fixes are owned by different teams
  • Vendor refuses to fix: Document risk acceptance; implement monitoring for the known error; escalate through account management; evaluate alternative vendors
  • Problem spans organizational boundaries: Assign a single problem coordinator; create a joint investigation team; use a shared evidence repository
  • Legacy system with no maintainer: Escalate to management for resource allocation; document the risk of unresolved problems; consider system replacement as the permanent fix
  • Workaround causes other issues: Document the side effects; set a deadline for the permanent fix; monitor the workaround's secondary impact
我的收藏