本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

incident-response

How to work a production incident remediation task. Use when the task title starts with "Incident:" or its description carries an incident id and a suggest/auto_fix policy.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md3.2 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Incident response

A task titled Incident: … is a live production problem, assigned to you by the system. Its description carries an incident id and a first-pass hypothesis produced by the rules engine, plus the policy in force (suggest or auto_fix). That hypothesis is a starting point, not a verdict.

Order of work

  1. Read the incident first. get_incident with the id from the task description: raw alert payload, timeline, occurrence count, current remedy hypothesis.
  2. Correlate with the tools you hold. get_environment for the affected environment (provider, health URL, binding status), then list_deployments — "what changed?" answers most incidents. list_runtime_errors with new: true tells you whether the error group started with the most recent deploy. query_runtime_logs with text: set to the error reads what the running service actually did.
  3. Classify. Config/credentials, dependency, capacity, or code defect. The classes need different fixes, and guessing the class wrong wastes the whole investigation.
  4. Write the remedy. propose_incident_remedy with a summary (root cause + fix), concrete steps — each as command → expected output → if it fails: … — the evidence you relied on, and an honest confidence. Set rollback: true when "redeploy the last good release" is the fix: you hold no rollback tool yourself, so under suggest the human decides from this proposal and under auto_fix the release engineer acts on it. If you are not sure, say so with a low confidence and name what you would need to check next — an honest "here is what I would check" is useful; a confident guess is not.
  5. Act per policy.
    • suggest (default): do NOT change production code. The proposal is the deliverable — move the task to human_uat with no code change and say in your closing message that the remedy awaits a human decision.
    • auto_fix: implement the remedy and take it through the normal pipeline — TDD, the standing acceptance criteria, all of it. A hotfix that skips them causes the next incident.
  6. Resolve only after verifying recovery. resolve_incident only after get_environment / list_runtime_errors show the environment is actually healthy again, with the note naming that evidence. Never mark an incident resolved because you shipped a fix — shipping and recovering are different facts.

Rules

  • A recurring incident (occurrences > 1, or a prior resolved incident with the same fingerprint) means the previous fix did not hold: fix the cause, not the symptom, and say explicitly why this time is different.
  • Never write a remedy you cannot execute step by step. "Investigate the database" is not a remedy; "connection pool is capped at 10 while the new worker opens 25 — raise DB_MAX_CONNS to 40 in the prod config" is.
  • If the incident payload is not enough to conclude anything, say what specific log, metric or access you need. Do not invent a cause to have something to write.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when writing acceptance criteria for a task - express each as an observable Given/When/Then that QA can execute, including negative cases

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月12日 更新

Use when the diff adds or changes an endpoint, resolver, RPC, job or query that takes an object id, a role check, a request binding or a tenant filter - BOLA/IDOR, function-level authorization, mass assignment and tenant scoping

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月12日 更新

Use on every UI change - semantic HTML, labels for controls, keyboard-navigable dialogs/menus, visible focus, and never color as the only signal

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月12日 更新

Use when a task changes any screen, form, dialog, menu or control - Lighthouse/axe scan of the changed screens, a keyboard walk, and the thresholds that fail a task

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月12日 更新

How to work a task returned with review, QA or UAT findings. Use when a task is in need_revision or PR review comments are in your context.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月12日 更新

Use when deciding whether a request needs an analiz task before implementation - the conditions that require the architect's analysis versus going straight to implementation

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月12日 更新

makifbaysal のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する