agentleFS
nisarthnisarth/claude-skills-store/skills/operations/incident-postmortem/SKILL.md

incident-postmortem

Skill1 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Write blameless postmortem reports covering timeline reconstruction, root cause analysis, contributing factors, and action items. Use after a production incident, service disruption, or near-miss. Trigger with "postmortem", "incident review", "write a post-mortem", "lessons learned", or "blameless review".

18 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use systematic-debugging.

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.
  • OpenAISkill

    systematic-debugging

    Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 15 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Write blameless postmortems documenting what happened, why, and how to prevent recurrence.

    line 24
  2. Distinctive:

    Action: Document what happened (caught in staging), analyze why not caught earlier (insufficient contract testing), define actions to …

    line 95
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep it blameless. "The deploy process allowed an untested change" not "Person X deployed without testing."

    line 99
  4. Distinctive:

    Write within 48 hours while memory is fresh.

    line 100
  5. Distinctive:

    Every action item needs a single owner and realistic deadline.

    line 102
  6. Distinctive:

    Look for patterns across postmortems for systemic fixes.

    line 104

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 15 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

Incident Postmortem

Write blameless postmortems documenting what happened, why, and how to prevent recurrence. Focus on systemic improvements, not individual fault.

Workflow

Step 1: Gather Data

Alerts and monitoring data, responder action timeline, communication logs (incident channel, status page), system logs and traces, customer impact data, and prior similar incidents.

Step 2: Reconstruct Timeline

Chronological account: detection (when and how), response (acknowledgment, who responded), diagnosis (hypotheses tested, dead ends), mitigation (impact reduced/eliminated), resolution (root cause fixed), and communication (stakeholder/customer notifications). Record timestamp, action, and actor for each entry.

Step 3: Root Cause Analysis

Apply "Five Whys" or similar. Identify root cause(s), contributing factors (process gaps, technical debt, human factors, organizational issues), detection gaps, and response friction.

Step 4: Assess Impact

Duration, users affected, revenue impact, SLA breach, reputational impact, and data impact (loss, corruption, exposure).

Step 5: Define Action Items

Preventive (address root cause), detective (improve monitoring/alerting), mitigative (reduce future impact), and process (update runbooks/escalation). Each action needs an owner, deadline, and tracking ticket.

Output Format

## Incident Postmortem
**Incident**: [Title] | **Severity**: [SEV1-4]
**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD] | **Duration**: [X hrs Y min]
**Status**: [Draft / Final]

### Summary
[3-4 sentence blameless summary]

### Impact
| Dimension | Measurement |
|-----------|-------------|
| Duration | [X hrs] |
| Users affected | [N] ([X]%) |
| SLA breach | [Yes/No] |

### Timeline
| Time (UTC) | Event | Actor |
|------------|-------|-------|
| HH:MM | [First sign] | [System] |
| HH:MM | [Alert fires] | [Monitoring] |
| HH:MM | [Mitigation applied] | [Name] |
| HH:MM | [Resolved] | [Name] |

### Root Cause
[Clear explanation]

### Contributing Factors
1. [Factor] -- [Process / Technical / Human / Organizational]

### What Went Well
- [Effective element]

### Action Items
| # | Action | Type | Owner | Due | Tracking |
|---|--------|------|-------|-----|----------|
| 1 | [Action] | Preventive | [Name] | [Date] | [Ticket] |

Examples

User: "Write a postmortem for yesterday's 2-hour API outage" Action: Reconstruct timeline, identify root cause (expired TLS certificate), contributing factors (no expiry monitoring, manual renewal), define actions (automate renewal, add alerting).

User: "Near-miss postmortem -- almost shipped a breaking API change" Action: Document what happened (caught in staging), analyze why not caught earlier (insufficient contract testing), define actions to strengthen the safety net.

Best Practices

  • Keep it blameless. "The deploy process allowed an untested change" not "Person X deployed without testing."
  • Write within 48 hours while memory is fresh.
  • Include "what went well" alongside improvements.
  • Every action item needs a single owner and realistic deadline.
  • Track action item completion -- postmortems without follow-through are theater.
  • Look for patterns across postmortems for systemic fixes.
  • Share broadly -- learning extends beyond the affected team.

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.