agentleFS
mayankjain1815-commitsmayankjain1815-commits/CITADEL/skills/postmortem/SKILL.md

postmortem

Skill4 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Auto-generates a structured postmortem from a completed campaign. Reads the campaign file, telemetry logs, and feature ledger. Produces a documented analysis of what broke, what the safety systems caught, and what patterns emerged. Can also be invoked manually for any incident.

44 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use hypothesis-driven-debugging, status-report and 5 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Sturla22Skill

    hypothesis-driven-debugging

    Debug by ranking concrete hypotheses and running discriminating checks. Use when a bug is hard to localize, many plausible failure points exist, logs are noisy or misleading, a symptom appears intermittently, or trial-and-error edits haven't worked.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    status-report

    Generate a status report with KPIs, risks, and action items. Use when writing a weekly or monthly update for leadership, summarizing project health with green/yellow/red status, surfacing risks and decisions that need stakeholder attention, or turning a pile of project tracker activity into a readable narrative.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • SaluteYBSkill

    skill-eval

    Evaluate, tune, and regression-check AgentSkills. Use when creating a new skill or improving an existing one and you need structured should-trigger, should-not-trigger, boundary-case, and execution-quality examples. Also use when auditing overlapping skills and sharpening trigger descriptions before release.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • neurofooSkill

    premortem

    Pre-mortem analysis that imagines a plan has failed, then works backward to identify causes and preventions. Use before launches, major decisions, or risky initiatives to surface hidden risks.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    incident-response

    Run an incident response workflow — triage, communicate, and write postmortem. Trigger with "we have an incident", "production is down", an alert that needs severity assessment, a status update mid-incident, or when writing a blameless postmortem after resolution.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • OpenAISkill

    threat-model

    Use when Codex is already in the threat-modeling phase of a security scan, the user explicitly invokes $threat-model, or the user explicitly asks to create, update, or persist a repository threat model. Do not use as the primary trigger for full PR, commit, branch, patch, or repository scans.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

11 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 39 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    After any Archon campaign completes (Archon should suggest it)

    line 30
  2. Distinctive:

    After a difficult debugging session

    line 31
  3. Distinctive:

    When the user says "what just happened" or "what broke"

    line 32
  4. Distinctive:

    When /do routes "postmortem", "retro", "what broke", "what happened"

    line 33
  5. Distinctive:

    Commit message patterns (fix: commits indicate bugs found)

    line 66
  6. Distinctive:

    Run during a campaign (only after completion or on demand)

    line 158
  7. Distinctive:

    Every "What Broke" entry has all 5 fields filled

    line 162
  8. Distinctive:

    If no failures occurred, say so honestly (don't manufacture drama)

    line 165
  9. Very specific:

    Campaign not found: If the specified campaign file doesn't exist, check .planning/campaigns/ for the most recently modified campaign.

    line 169
  10. Very specific:

    If .planning/postmortems/ does not exist: Create it before writing. If .planning/ itself doesn't exist, output the postmortem inline and …

    line 175
  11. Very specific:

    After displaying the HANDOFF block, suggest: Run /learn {campaign-slug} to extract patterns into the knowledge base.

    line 190

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 39 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

/postmortem — Campaign Postmortem Generator

Orientation

Use when: A campaign just completed and you want a structured analysis of what broke, what safety systems caught, and what patterns emerged. Also for ad-hoc incident analysis from recent git history.

Don't use when: You want to preserve session context for the next conversation (use /session-handoff), extract reusable patterns from findings into the knowledge base (use /learn), or score and improve quality iteratively (use /improve).

When to Use

  • After any Archon campaign completes (Archon should suggest it)
  • After a difficult debugging session
  • When the user says "what just happened" or "what broke"
  • When /do routes "postmortem", "retro", "what broke", "what happened"

Inputs

One of:

  1. A campaign file path (.planning/campaigns/*.md)
  2. A time range ("last session", "today", "this week")
  3. Nothing (reads the most recent completed campaign)

Protocol

Step 1: GATHER

Collect data from all available sources:

From the campaign file (if it exists):

  • Direction vs what was actually built (scope drift?)
  • Phase completion timeline (which phases needed rework?)
  • Decision log entries (what architectural choices were made?)
  • Review queue items (what needed human eyes?)
  • Circuit breaker activations (what hit the limit?)
  • Feature ledger (what shipped?)

From telemetry (.planning/telemetry/):

  • hook-timing.jsonl: which hooks fired most, any patterns
  • hook-errors.log: what was blocked, what failed, what had parse errors
  • Circuit breaker trips
  • Quality gate violations

From git history:

  • Commits during the campaign period
  • Files changed (which areas got the most churn?)
  • Any reverts (what was undone?)
  • Commit message patterns (fix: commits indicate bugs found)

From the session itself (if no campaign):

  • Recent tool calls and their outcomes
  • Files edited and errors encountered

Step 2: ANALYZE

Identify patterns across the data:

  1. What broke: List every failure, error, or unexpected outcome. For each: what happened, what caught it (hook/gate/human/nothing), what it cost (time, rework, tokens).
  2. What the safety systems caught: Circuit breaker activations, quality gate blocks, anti-pattern warnings, typecheck failures. This is the "invisible value" section — problems prevented.
  3. What drifted: Compare the campaign direction to what was built. Did scope expand? Did phases get skipped or reordered? Did the architecture change mid-build?
  4. What patterns emerged: Recurring error types, files that kept needing fixes, phases that took longest, common anti-patterns.

Step 3: PRODUCE

Write to .planning/postmortems/postmortem-{slug}-{date}.md:

# Postmortem: {Campaign Name or Session Description}

> Date: {ISO date}
> Campaign: {path to campaign file, or "ad-hoc session"}
> Duration: {time from first to last commit}
> Outcome: {completed | partial | parked}

## Summary
{2-3 sentences: what was attempted, what happened, what the result was}

## What Broke
{Numbered list. For each:}
### {N}. {Short description}
- **What happened:** {the failure}
- **Caught by:** {hook name / quality gate / human / nothing}
- **Cost:** {rework time, files affected, phases repeated}
- **Fix:** {what resolved it}
- **Infrastructure created:** {new hook rule, new anti-pattern, new end condition — or "none needed"}

## What Safety Systems Caught
{Things that WOULD have been problems without the hooks/gates}
| System | What It Caught | Times | Impact Prevented |
|--------|---------------|-------|-----------------|
| {hook/gate name} | {description} | {count} | {what would have happened} |

## Scope Analysis
- **Planned:** {what the campaign direction said}
- **Built:** {what the feature ledger shows}
- **Drift:** {none | minor | significant — with specifics}

## Patterns
{Recurring themes worth watching:}
- {pattern 1}
- {pattern 2}

## Recommendations
{Concrete next actions:}
1. {recommendation — e.g., "Add anti-pattern rule for X"}
2. {recommendation — e.g., "Phase Y needs tighter end conditions"}

## Numbers
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Phases planned | {N} |
| Phases completed | {N} |
| Commits | {N} |
| Files changed | {N} |
| Circuit breaker trips | {N} |
| Quality gate blocks | {N} |
| Anti-pattern warnings | {N} |
| Rework cycles | {N} |

Step 4: HANDOFF

Output the HANDOFF block from the Exit Protocol, then suggest: Run /learn {campaign-slug} to extract patterns into the knowledge base.

What /postmortem Does NOT Do

  • Invent failures that didn't happen (real data only)
  • Blame the user or the model (document what happened, not whose fault)
  • Recommend changes to skill files (that's for the user to decide)
  • Run during a campaign (only after completion or on demand)

Quality Gates

  • Every "What Broke" entry has all 5 fields filled
  • Numbers section has real data (not estimates)
  • Recommendations are concrete actions (not "be more careful")
  • If no failures occurred, say so honestly (don't manufacture drama)

Fringe Cases

Campaign not found: If the specified campaign file doesn't exist, check .planning/campaigns/ for the most recently modified campaign. If no campaigns exist, run in ad-hoc mode using recent git history and session context.

No telemetry data: Proceed without telemetry. Mark the "What Safety Systems Caught" table as "No telemetry available" and the Numbers section fields as "N/A". Don't manufacture data.

Partial campaign (parked or in-progress): Generate the postmortem with Outcome: partial. Document what was completed and what was parked. Include a "Remaining Work" section listing incomplete phases.

If .planning/postmortems/ does not exist: Create it before writing. If .planning/ itself doesn't exist, output the postmortem inline and note: "Run /do setup to initialize .planning/ for future storage."

Exit Protocol

---HANDOFF---
- Postmortem: {name}
- Document: .planning/postmortems/postmortem-{slug}-{date}.md
- Failures documented: {count}
- Safety catches: {count}
- Recommendations: {count}
- Reversibility: green — one file written to .planning/postmortems/; git rm to undo
---

After displaying the HANDOFF block, suggest: Run /learn {campaign-slug} to extract patterns into the knowledge base.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.