incident-triage
Skill1 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub
First response for a production or customer-facing incident — blast radius, stabilize vs fix, evidence to gather. Use when production is down, data is wrong in prod, users are impacted, or the user says incident, outage, sev, or page.
22 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- superset-sh/supersettheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- briiirussell/cybersecurity-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Happy-Technologies-LLC/happy-platform-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- rpraharaj/ai-sdlcedited, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- ParadevAI/Paradevtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- riteshsonawane1372/devops-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use write-runbook, threat-hunting and 3 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.
MaheshAwasareSkillwrite-runbook
Generate an operational runbook for a service from its code, config, and dependencies — what to do when it breaks, where to look, how to roll back, who to escalate to. Use proactively before a service goes to production, after a major incident, or when handing off operational ownership.
Also in 3 projects that use this
allanninalSkillthreat-hunting
Hunt threats using Sigma detection rules and security analysis techniques. Use when investigating security incidents, creating detection rules, or analyzing suspicious activity.
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillapi-design
Guide for designing and documenting RESTful APIs. Use when asked to design an API, create endpoints, or document an API.
Also in 3 projects that use this
SentrySkillsecurity-review
Finds exploitable application security vulnerabilities in code changes. Use for Warden security scans, appsec review, OWASP-style checks, authentication or authorization bugs, injection, XSS, SSRF, path traversal, secrets, unsafe crypto, webhook verification, open redirects, or sensitive data exposure.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Microsoft AzureSkillrelease-notes
Author and update release notes for Azure App Configuration libraries and providers. USE FOR: write release notes, add release note entry, update release notes, draft release notes, new version release notes, format release notes. DO NOT USE FOR: generating changelogs from git history, writing internal engineering notes.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions22 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- rpraharaj/ai-sdlc★ 020% same
Wrote their own version · 21
- ParadevAI/Paradev★ 16ksame name
- superset-sh/superset★ 16ksame name
- briiirussell/cybersecurity-skills★ 489same name
- Happy-Technologies-LLC/happy-platform-skills★ 41same name
- Indium-AI-Labs/indium-agentkit★ 18same name
- Ionate-Technologies/indium-agentkit★ 17same name
- Mozurok/fhorja.dev★ 10same name
- aws-samples/sample-aws-ops-skills-for-agents★ 8same name
- ByronScottJones/Agents★ 7same name
- aprameyak/coding-skills★ 1same name
11 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 repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- templates/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- commitSkill
- cut-releaseSkill
- data-changeSkill
- debugSkill
- engineering-barSkill
- explain-codeSkill
- explore-codebaseSkill
- fix-ciSkill
- handoffSkill
- implement-changeSkill
- lean-reviewSkill
- open-prSkill
- performanceSkill
- production-passSkill
- ready-to-mergeSkill
- record-decisionSkill
- refactor-safelySkill
- resolve-conflictsSkill
- revert-changeSkill
- review-changeSkill
- security-passSkill
- shape-workSkill
- ship-notesSkill
- start-projectSkill
- upgrade-depsSkill
- verify-uiSkill
- write-architectureSkill
- write-designSkill
- write-dev-tasksSkill
- write-docsSkill
- write-prdSkill
- write-testsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 18 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Read AGENTS.md if present.
- Distinctive: line 18
Write this immediately from what you have.
- Very specific: line 32
If this is a local test failure or a ticket with no live impact, this is debug or shape-work, not an incident.
- Distinctive: line 43
Do not page more systems than the evidence supports.
- Distinctive: line 58
Do not run destructive data repairs (drop, unscoped delete, unbatched rewrite) unless the user explicitly asked and you wrote the blast …
- Distinctive: line 68
If you cannot access prod, list the exact checks a human should run.
- Distinctive: line 72
Keep a running log in the reply (and a file only if the user asked or this repo stores incident notes):
- Very specific: line 85
When the fire is contained, debug + write-tests for the root cause, then record-decision if the response taught a lasting rule.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 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 triage
Stabilize first. Do not start a feature. Do not "improve" unrelated code while prod is hurting.
Read AGENTS.md if present.
Step 1 — Snapshot (do not wait for perfect data)
Write this immediately from what you have. Unknown is allowed; label it.
## Incident
- Started (known or approx):
- Symptom (what users or systems see):
- Expected:
- Scope (who/what): unknown | <service, region, tenant, % >
- Severity (your call): user-blocking | degraded | latent
- What we know:
- What we do not know:If this is a local test failure or a ticket with no live impact, this is debug or shape-work, not an incident. Say so and stop.
Step 2 — Blast radius
From logs, metrics, feature flags, recent deploys, and the failing path in code (read, do not rewrite yet):
- What still works
- What is broken
- Whether it is getting worse
- The last change that could explain it (
git logon the path, release notes, flag flips) — guess only if labeled
Do not page more systems than the evidence supports.
Step 3 — Stabilize vs fix
Pick one primary action and say why:
| Action | When |
| Rollback / flag off | A recent change or flag lines up with the start time and revert is safe |
| Mitigate | Limit traffic, disable a path, fail closed, serve stale — without a full fix |
| Fix forward | Cause is known, fix is smaller than rollback, or rollback is impossible |
| Observe | Impact is gone and you are confirming; do not declare closed yet |
Rollback and mitigate come before a clever fix. If you choose Rollback / flag off, the mechanical undo is revert-change (and this repo's flag/console if that is the rollback). Pass the snapshot, selected action, evidence window, and recovery check to the next skill; nested skills must reuse that context rather than restarting triage. If you choose fix forward, hand the actual diagnosis to debug (repro if you can get one without making things worse; otherwise use prod evidence as the baseline).
Do not run destructive data repairs (drop, unscoped delete, unbatched rewrite) unless the user explicitly asked and you wrote the blast radius.
Step 4 — Evidence
Gather only what changes the next action. Typical sources this repo already has: logs, traces, error reporter, deploy history, feature-flag console, the failing query. Record:
- Queries or dashboard links you used (no secrets)
- Time range
- One representative error (redact tokens)
If you cannot access prod, list the exact checks a human should run.
Step 5 — Comms and next
Keep a running log in the reply (and a file only if the user asked or this repo stores incident notes):
## Actions
- <time> <what> <result>
## Current status
mitigating | monitoring | fix-forward | needs-user
## Next
<debug | revert-change | data-change | stop — need user> — <one sentence>When the fire is contained, debug + write-tests for the root cause, then record-decision if the response taught a lasting rule. handoff if another person or session will take over.
Done
The snapshot, blast radius, chosen action, evidence, and next skill. Do not commit a speculative fix unless the user chose fix-forward and debug produced a real cause.
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.

