agentleFS
philpalmieriphilpalmieri/engineering-manager-skills/skills/github/oncall-review/SKILL.md

oncall-review

Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Score the quality of an on-call or first-responder shift based on issue completeness, handoff quality, and engagement signals. Use when reviewing a completed on-call shift or generating team metrics.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    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:

    Handoff: look for a handoff comment or section

    line 37
  2. Distinctive:

    Incident response: If incidents fired, were they triaged promptly?

    line 62
  3. Distinctive:

    Write a summary (to the vault or inline, depending on context):

    line 66
  4. Distinctive:

    If maintaining a tracking doc, append this to the historical record.

    line 87
  5. Distinctive:

    Flag data issues: If the issue body appears truncated (common with long checklists), note which criteria couldn't be assessed.

    line 103

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

On-Call Quality Review

Evaluate the quality of a completed on-call (or first-responder) shift by scoring against a rubric. Produces a star rating and qualitative assessment.

When to use

  • "How was this week's on-call?", "rate the FR shift", "on-call quality check"
  • As part of periodic team health reviews

Prerequisites

  • A GitHub issue tracking the on-call shift (typically auto-created with a checklist template)
  • Access to the issue via gh CLI
  • A scoring rubric stored in the vault (location from setup config)

Process

Step 1: Fetch the shift issue

gh issue view {number} --repo {org}/{team-repo} --json title,body,comments,labels,assignees,createdAt,closedAt

Extract:

  • Assignee: who was on-call
  • Checklist items: count total, count checked
  • Comments: count total, assess quality (see below)
  • Handoff: look for a handoff comment or section

Step 2: Score against rubric

Apply the scoring rubric. A reasonable default rubric:

CriterionPointsHow to assess
Checklist completion ≥ 20%+1Count checked / total checkboxes
Checklist completion ≥ 50%+1Same
Comments ≥ 3+1Count non-bot comments
Comments ≥ 6+1Same
Handoff completed+1Look for a handoff comment, section, or linked handoff issue

Maximum score: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Teams should customize this rubric to match their expectations. Store it in the vault (e.g., Areas/Team Metrics/On-Call Quality Rubric.md).

Step 3: Qualitative assessment

Beyond the raw score, assess:

  • Investigation quality: Did comments show actual debugging (Splunk queries, Sentry links, SLO analysis)? Or just "acknowledged, auto-resolved"?
  • Checklist engagement: Were unchecked items skipped because they didn't apply, or because they were missed?
  • Handoff quality: Does the handoff give the next person enough context to start without spelunking? Or is it "nothing happened this week"?
  • Incident response: If incidents fired, were they triaged promptly? Is there follow-up documented?

Step 4: Output

Write a summary (to the vault or inline, depending on context):

### On-Call Review: @{assignee} ({date_range})

**Score: ⭐⭐⭐** (3/5)

| Criterion | Result |
|-----------|--------|
| Checkboxes ≥ 20% | ✅ (47%) |
| Checkboxes ≥ 50% | ❌ (47%) |
| Comments ≥ 3 | ✅ (3) |
| Comments ≥ 6 | ❌ (3) |
| Handoff | ⚠️ Partial |

**Notes:**
- Investigation quality was above average (detailed SLO breakdown with monitoring links)
- Checkbox completion hurt by [reason if identifiable]
- Handoff was [complete/partial/missing]: [specifics]

If maintaining a tracking doc, append this to the historical record.

Rubric customization

The default rubric above is a starting point. Teams should adjust based on:

  • Shift type: On-call vs. first-responder may have different expectations
  • Team size: Smaller teams may have fewer incidents and lower comment baselines
  • Maturity: New teams should start with lower thresholds and raise them over time

Store the active rubric in the vault so the team can see and iterate on it.

Rules

  • Score the shift, not the person. The review assesses the quality of the work product, not the individual. Frame feedback constructively.
  • Account for quiet weeks. A low score during a genuinely quiet week (no incidents, no alerts) should be noted as context, not penalized.
  • Flag data issues. If the issue body appears truncated (common with long checklists), note which criteria couldn't be assessed.
  • Be honest. A 2-star shift is a 2-star shift. Don't inflate scores to be nice, but do explain what would have made it better.

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.