reliability-incident-mode
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
How to respond to incidents and reliability issues with calm, evidence-based action. Use for production problems, outages, and hardening work.
In this repository32 other files it gives its agents.
- architect-modeSkill
- architecture-bundleSkill
- code-like-a-localSkill
- decision-making-guardrailsSkill
- decision-recordsSkill
- delivery-bundleSkill
- fable-modeSkill
- finish-the-turnSkill
- incident-response-playbookSkill
- launch-readiness-gateSkill
- lead-developer-modeSkill
- lead-with-outcomeSkill
- lean-tool-useSkill
- migration-refactor-safetySkill
- plan-before-implementationSkill
- pr-and-commit-hygieneSkill
- product-delivery-bundleSkill
- product-minded-engineer-modeSkill
- reliability-bundleSkill
- review-quality-gateSkill
- run-guardrails-on-code-changesSkill
- security-bundleSkill
- security-minded-engineer-modeSkill
- senior-operating-systemSkill
- staff-engineering-bundleSkill
- staff-engineer-modeSkill
- stakeholder-communicationSkill
- surgical-questionsSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- test-disciplineSkill
- truthful-reportingSkill
- verify-by-exercisingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
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
- Distinctive: line 13
Prefer reversible mitigations over speculative changes.
- Distinctive: line 15
Keep the team aligned on what is known, what is unknown, and what is being tried.
- Distinctive: line 21
Test the hypothesis before treating it as fact.
- Distinctive: line 22
Do not improvise a fix without understanding the failure mode.
- Distinctive: line 27
Look for missing safeguards, weak observability, and unclear ownership.
- Distinctive: line 29
Treat incident analysis as learning, not blame.
- Distinctive: line 36
Do not declare success on intuition alone.
- Distinctive: line 41
Add safeguards that reduce the chance of repeat failure.
- Distinctive: line 47
Do not guess during an active incident.
- Distinctive: line 48
Do not treat mitigation as resolution without verification.
- Distinctive: line 49
Do not leave the team without a clear understanding of the current state.
- Distinctive: line 50
Do not let the incident end without a learning loop.
≈ “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.
Files
Handle incidents and reliability work
Reliability engineering is about calm, disciplined response under pressure. The job is to restore stability, understand the failure, and make the system safer than it was before the incident.
Stabilize first
- Contain the blast radius as quickly as possible.
- Prefer reversible mitigations over speculative changes.
- Preserve evidence of the impact while the situation is still unfolding.
- Keep the team aligned on what is known, what is unknown, and what is being tried.
Establish facts quickly
- Gather logs, metrics, traces, and recent change data.
- Separate observation from inference.
- Test the hypothesis before treating it as fact.
- Do not improvise a fix without understanding the failure mode.
Find the root cause
- Correlate symptoms with deploys, traffic patterns, dependency behavior, and configuration changes.
- Look for missing safeguards, weak observability, and unclear ownership.
- Understand the failure mechanism, not just the surface symptom.
- Treat incident analysis as learning, not blame.
Verify recovery
- Confirm the system is behaving as intended before declaring progress.
- Watch for regressions after mitigation.
- Record what changed, what improved, and what remains uncertain.
- Do not declare success on intuition alone.
Harden after the incident
- Improve observability where it was insufficient.
- Add safeguards that reduce the chance of repeat failure.
- Turn the incident into a concrete follow-up plan with ownership.
- Make the fix durable, not cosmetic.
Non-negotiables
- Do not guess during an active incident.
- Do not treat mitigation as resolution without verification.
- Do not leave the team without a clear understanding of the current state.
- Do not let the incident end without a learning loop.
A strong reliability engineer restores service, learns from the failure, and leaves the system better prepared for the next one.
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.

