incident-responder
Skill36 starsChanged 16 days agoMITView on GitHub
Structured incident response workflow — detect, investigate, communicate, and resolve using session data as evidence. Use when an incident is declared, a production issue is reported, or the on-call engineer needs session evidence.
11 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- alphasafal/production-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- xfstudio/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- Ghosteken/agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Oct 1, 2026
- OneWave-AI/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 21, 2026
- jshsakura/awesome-opencode-skillstheir own version, first seen Jul 8, 2026
- Nikoxkx/Agent-Skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 8, 2026
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 11
- OneWave-AI/claude-skills★ 378same name
- jshsakura/awesome-opencode-skills★ 30same name
- belokonm/claude-supercode-skills★ 11same name
- rade-nugroho/Agentic-Enteprises-Skill★ 9same name
- xfstudio/skills★ 9same name
- daemon-blockint-tech/Agentic-Enteprises-Skill★ 8same name
- ai4brands-design/claude-skills★ 2same name
- Ghosteken/agent-harness★ 2same name
- alphasafal/production-agent-skills★ 1same name
- GoogleMakesMeBetter/claude-skills-collection★ 1same name
1 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository45 other files it gives its agents.
- a11y-analyzerSkill
- annotation-opsSkill
- anomaly-detectorSkill
- api-monitorSkill
- benchmark-analyzerSkill
- campaign-trackerSkill
- changelog-detectiveSkill
- cohort-compassSkill
- comparisonsSkill
- customer-360Skill
- dashboard-builderSkill
- deploy-radarSkill
- error-forensicsSkill
- experiment-analyzerSkill
- feature-adoptionSkill
- form-analyzerSkill
- frustration-hunterSkill
- funnel-doctorSkill
- general-analysisSkill
- heatmap-generatorSkill
- jira-bug-reporterSkill
- journey-builderSkill
- lifecycle-analyzerSkill
- metric-auditorSkill
- mobile-analyzerSkill
- nps-proxySkill
- onboarding-tutorSkill
- page-performanceSkill
- persona-builderSkill
- predictive-alertsSkill
- privacy-auditorSkill
- query-translatorSkill
- quick-statsSkill
- report-deckSkill
- retention-analyzerSkill
- revenue-impactSkill
- scroll-depth-analyzerSkill
- segment-wizardSkill
- session-playlistSkill
- session-reviewSkill
- session-searchSkill
- slack-reporterSkill
- user-journeySkill
- webhook-healthSkill
- weekly-digestSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 11 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 30
Use free fullstory:discover_groups and fullstory:get_opportunity_stats for live signals.
- Very specific: line 36
If the incident was detected by anomaly-detector, predictive-alerts, or a user report:
- Distinctive: line 60
When did it start? (pinpoint the timestamp)
- Very specific: line 88
Use slack-reporter to format updates for the team:
- Distinctive: line 121
After the fix is deployed:
- Distinctive: line 131
No new frustration signals introduced by the fix
- Distinctive: line 135
After the incident is resolved, prepare a summary:
- Very specific: line 159
Always check for a recent deploy.
- Distinctive: line 161
Don't declare severity without asking.
- Distinctive: line 162
After resolution, always verify.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 11 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.
Files
Incident Responder
Structured incident response using Fullstory session data — detect the blast radius, find affected users, provide evidence to engineering, and communicate status.
When to Use
- "We have an incident — checkout is down"
- "Users are reporting payment failures — investigate"
- "Declare an incident for the API errors on /dashboard"
- "What's the blast radius of the 504 errors?"
- "Update the incident status for the team"
Mental Model
An incident has a lifecycle:
- Detect: Something is wrong (alert fired, user report, anomaly detected)
- Triage: How bad is it? How many users? What's the blast radius?
- Investigate: What's the root cause? Session evidence.
- Communicate: Tell the team. Status updates.
- Resolve: Fix deployed, verified.
- Retrospect: What happened? How do we prevent it?
Fullstory MCP helps with steps 1-4 and 6. Step 5 (the actual fix) is on engineering.
Use free fullstory:discover_groups and fullstory:get_opportunity_stats for live signals. Discovery accepts one scope at a time (page_id, domain, app_name, segment_id, or funnel_id); use a segment for device/user filters and the live schema for time ranges. Use computed metrics for exact custom windows.
Workflow
Step 1: Detect and declare
If the incident was detected by anomaly-detector, predictive-alerts, or a user report:
Declare the incident with severity:
- SEV1 — Critical: Core functionality broken for all users (checkout down, login broken, data loss)
- SEV2 — High: Core functionality broken for some users or secondary feature broken for all
- SEV3 — Medium: Non-critical feature broken, workaround exists
- SEV4 — Low: Cosmetic issue, edge case, investigation-only
Step 2: Triage — measure blast radius
Quickly quantify impact:
fullstory:build_metric(
query="checkout completion rate",
output_type="single_number"
)
fullstory:compute_metric(metric_id, time_range="last_1_hour")
→ if 0% or near-zero, checkout is completely broken (SEV1)Key triage questions:
- How many users are affected? (absolute count)
- What percentage of users? (of total traffic)
- Is it specific to device/browser/geo? (or everyone?)
- When did it start? (pinpoint the timestamp)
- Is it getting worse? (accelerating or stable?)
Step 3: Investigate — find the root cause
fullstory:discover_groups()
→ any new frustration signals coinciding with the incident?
fullstory:build_metric(
query="errors on /checkout in last 1 hour by type",
output_type="top_n"
)
→ what specific error is occurring?
fullstory:compute_metric(metric_id)
fullstory:get_sessions(metric_id="<error metric id>")
→ pull sessions from affected users
→ session-context: "What happened when this user tried to checkout? What error did they see? What was the last successful action?"Cross-reference with:
deploy-radar: Did a recent deploy cause this?api-monitor: Is a backend endpoint failing?error-forensics: What's the specific error and stack trace?
Step 4: Communicate — status updates
Use slack-reporter to format updates for the team:
Initial alert (within 5 minutes of detection):
🚨 SEV1: Checkout is down — 0% completion rate since 14:32 UTC
• All users affected (not device/browser specific)
• Started immediately after v2.3.1 deploy at 14:30
• Suspected cause: deploy regression on /api/orders
• Engineering investigating — updates in thread 🧵
• [Metric](link) | [Sessions](link)Update (every 30 minutes):
🔄 SEV1 Update — 15:00 UTC (T+28min)
• Root cause confirmed: /api/orders returning 500 after deploy
• Fix identified: rollback deploy to v2.3.0
• Rollback in progress — ETA 15:10
• 1,200 users affected so farResolution:
✅ SEV1 RESOLVED — 15:12 UTC (T+40min)
• Deploy v2.3.1 rolled back to v2.3.0
• Checkout conversion returning to normal (18% and climbing)
• 1,400 total users affected during 40-minute outage
• Postmortem scheduled for tomorrow 10:00
• [Incident doc](link)Step 5: Verify resolution
After the fix is deployed:
fullstory:build_metric(query="checkout completion rate", output_type="single_number")
fullstory:compute_metric(metric_id, time_range="last_30_minutes")
→ confirm conversion is back to baselineCheck for:
- Conversion rate back within normal range
- Error rate dropped to baseline
- No new frustration signals introduced by the fix
Step 6: Retrospect
After the incident is resolved, prepare a summary:
- What happened? (timeline)
- What was the root cause?
- How many users were affected? (blast radius)
- What was the business impact? (revenue estimate via
revenue-impact) - How was it detected? (alert, user report, anomaly)
- How long to detect, triage, resolve? (MTTD, MTTR)
- What prevented faster detection/resolution?
- Action items to prevent recurrence
Incident Commands Quick Reference
| Command | What it does |
| "Declare SEV1 — checkout is down" | Starts incident response workflow |
| "What's the blast radius?" | Quantifies affected users, devices, geo |
| "Find sessions from affected users" | Pulls session evidence for engineering |
| "Update the incident — we're rolling back" | Formats a Slack status update |
| "Verify the fix — is checkout working?" | Checks metrics post-fix |
| "Generate the postmortem" | Creates incident summary with timeline and metrics |
Guidelines
- Speed over perfection in triage. A rough blast radius estimate in 2 minutes is better than a precise count in 20. Engineering needs to know: "everyone or some users?"
- Always check for a recent deploy. 60-70% of incidents are deploy-related.
deploy-radarshould be the first thing you check. - Session evidence is gold for engineering. "Checkout is broken" is less useful than "Users see '504 Gateway Timeout' after clicking 'Place Order' — here's a session URL showing the error."
- Don't declare severity without asking. SEV1 means drop everything. If you're unsure, say "This looks like SEV1 or SEV2 — how do you want to classify it?"
- After resolution, always verify. A fix that "should work" is not the same as a fix that's confirmed working through session data.
- Postmortems should be blameless. Focus on "what in our process allowed this to happen?" not "who caused this?"
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
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.

