计划执行与检查节点
executing-plans
按既定实施计划完成工作,保持过程检查和反馈。
incident-response【效率与协作】Run a structured incident response. Use when the user says "we have an incident", "production is down", "service is degraded", "on-call response", "p0 incident", "something is broken in prod", "help me manage this incident", "incident commander", or there is an active production issue requiring coordinated response - even if they don't explicitly say…
独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准
name: incident-response description: > Run a structured incident response. Use when the user says "we have an incident", "production is down", "service is degraded", "on-call response", "p0 incident", "something is broken in prod", "help me manage this incident", "incident commander", or there is an active production issue requiring coordinated response
Based on the Google SRE Book by Beyer, Jones, Petoff & Murphy. Google's incident management framework establishes clear roles, communication protocols, and decision hierarchies that let teams respond to complex outages without chaos. The core principle: when systems fail, the response should be calmer and more structured than the incident itself.
Three SRE roles during an incident:
If in doubt, declare. It's always easier to stand down an incident than to escalate a non-incident that becomes one.
Set severity:
| Severity | Criteria | Response time |
|---|---|---|
| SEV1 / P0 | Total outage, revenue impact, data loss | Immediate - all hands |
| SEV2 / P1 | Significant degradation, major feature down | < 15 min response |
| SEV3 / P2 | Minor degradation, workaround available | < 1 hour response |
One person owns the incident. The IC:
Create a dedicated Slack channel or incident doc immediately. Post within 2 minutes:
INCIDENT: [service] [severity]
IC: [name]
Operations: [name]
Status: Investigating
Symptoms: [what users are experiencing]
Started: [approximate time]
Operations Lead: form a hypothesis before running commands.
SRE principle: change is the enemy of stability. Look at what changed first.
Communications Lead posts status updates every 15 minutes (SEV1) or 30 minutes (SEV2) even if nothing has changed. "We are still investigating" is a valid update. Silence breeds panic.
Internal update format:
[TIME] Status: [Investigating / Mitigating / Monitoring / Resolved]
Impact: [what users are experiencing]
Current action: [what the team is doing right now]
Next update: [time]
Mitigation = stop the bleeding. Fix = address the root cause.
Mitigation actions (in order of preference):
Apply the fastest, lowest-risk mitigation first.
When user impact is resolved (not when root cause is found):
RESOLVED: [service] is restored
Duration: [start] to [end]
Impact: [who was affected, what was degraded]
Resolution: [what action resolved it]
Root cause: [preliminary - full postmortem to follow]
Next step: Postmortem within [48h for SEV1, 1 week for SEV2]
1. IC also making production changes Bad: The incident commander is also running kubectl commands and checking logs. Good: IC delegates all technical actions. Two roles, two people. IC stays at the strategic level.
2. No regular status updates Bad: Stakeholders hear nothing for 45 minutes. Good: Communications Lead posts every 15 minutes (SEV1). Even "still investigating" counts.
3. Fixing root cause under pressure instead of mitigating Bad: "We know the bug, let me push a fix to prod." Good: Rollback first, restore service, then fix properly in a controlled environment.
4. Declaring the incident over when root cause is unknown Bad: Service is restored, incident closed, no postmortem scheduled. Good: Resolution = user impact resolved. Root cause investigation continues. Postmortem is mandatory for SEV1/SEV2.