Post mortem
Skill bromso/metapowers/plugins/project-management/skills/post-mortem
Conduct incident or project post-mortem with root cause analysisFrom its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add bromso/metapowers --skill post-mortemAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
7.8 KB, ~1.8k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Post-Mortem
Conduct a post-mortem for "$ARGUMENTS". Define the incident or event, build a timeline, perform root cause analysis using the 5 Whys technique, and produce corrective actions at multiple levels with owners and review dates.
Prerequisites
Check that .project/$ARGUMENTS/00-initiate.md exists. If it does not, tell the user to run an Initiate skill first (e.g., project-charter) and stop.
If the user passes --skip-checks, skip the prerequisite check and log the skip to .project/$ARGUMENTS/skip-log.md with a timestamp and reason.
Process
-
Read existing context:
- Read
.project/$ARGUMENTS/00-initiate.mdfor project context, team setup, and stakeholder information - Read
.project/$ARGUMENTS/03-review.mdif it exists (for sprint metrics and delivery data around the incident period) - Read
.project/$ARGUMENTS/04-improve.mdif it exists (for previous post-mortems, retrospective themes, and known risks) - Read
.project/$ARGUMENTS/02-sprint.mdif it exists (for standup history and blocker log around the incident period)
- Read
-
Define the incident or event:
- Ask the user to describe what happened — get the facts before analysis
- Document clearly:
- What happened — objective description of the incident or event
- When it happened — start time, detection time, resolution time, total duration
- Who was affected — users, customers, internal teams, stakeholders
- Impact — quantify where possible (users affected, revenue lost, data compromised, SLA breached)
- Severity — classify as critical (service down), major (significant degradation), minor (limited impact), or informational (near-miss)
- Distinguish between the symptoms (what was observed) and the incident itself (what actually went wrong)
-
Build timeline of events:
- Reconstruct the incident chronologically from earliest relevant event to resolution
- For each event in the timeline, document:
- Timestamp — when it happened (as precise as possible)
- What happened — factual description of the event
- Who was involved — which person or system took action or was affected
- Impact at this point — how the situation changed
- Key milestones to capture:
- When the conditions for the incident were first introduced (the seed)
- When the incident actually began (the trigger)
- When the incident was first detected (by monitoring, users, or team)
- When the first responder engaged
- What diagnostic steps were taken and in what order
- When the root cause was identified
- When the fix was applied
- When service was fully restored
- When the incident was formally closed
- Note any gaps in the timeline — periods where it is unclear what happened or why
-
Identify root causes using 5 Whys:
- Start with the incident statement and ask "Why did this happen?"
- For each answer, ask "Why?" again until reaching a systemic cause (typically 3-5 levels deep)
- Continue until the answer points to a process, system, or organizational issue — not a person's mistake
- Document each level of the 5 Whys chain clearly:
- Why 1: [symptom-level cause]
- Why 2: [deeper cause]
- Why 3: [process or system gap]
- Why 4: [organizational or structural cause]
- Why 5: [root cause — the systemic issue]
- If there are multiple causal chains (multiple contributing factors), run 5 Whys on each
- Stop when the answer is something the team or organization can actually change
-
Distinguish contributing factors from root causes:
- List all factors that contributed to the incident
- Classify each as:
- Root cause — the primary systemic issue that, if fixed, would have prevented the incident
- Contributing factor — made the incident worse or more likely, but was not the primary cause
- Mitigating factor — reduced the impact or duration of the incident
- There is usually 1-2 root causes and several contributing factors
- Common contributing factors: missing monitoring, unclear runbooks, single points of failure, inadequate testing, communication gaps
-
Define corrective actions at 3 levels:
- Immediate actions (fix the symptom):
- What was done to resolve this specific incident
- Any temporary measures in place (workarounds, manual processes, increased monitoring)
- Timeline for removing temporary measures
- Short-term actions (prevent recurrence):
- Specific changes to prevent this exact incident from happening again
- Examples: add monitoring alert, write a test for the failure case, update the runbook, fix the specific bug
- Target completion: within 1-2 sprints
- Long-term actions (fix the system):
- Structural changes to prevent this class of incidents
- Examples: improve deployment pipeline, add chaos testing, redesign the architecture for resilience, establish review processes
- Target completion: within 1-2 quarters
- Each action item must have an owner and a deadline
- Immediate actions (fix the symptom):
-
Identify what went well:
- Not everything in an incident is negative — capture the positives
- Examples of things that went well:
- Fast detection (monitoring worked as intended)
- Quick response (on-call engineer engaged promptly)
- Effective communication (stakeholders were informed, team coordinated well)
- Graceful degradation (system failed partially rather than completely)
- Good documentation (runbooks were helpful, previous post-mortems informed the response)
- Recognizing what went well builds team confidence and reinforces good practices
-
Write blameless summary:
- Write a concise summary of the incident and its resolution
- Focus on systems and processes, not individual people's mistakes
- Use language like "the process did not catch" rather than "person X failed to"
- Frame findings as opportunities to strengthen the system, not as failures
- Acknowledge that the people involved made reasonable decisions given the information they had at the time
- If human error was involved, ask what about the system made that error possible or likely
-
Assign action item owners and review dates:
- For each corrective action, assign a single owner (not a team — one person accountable)
- Set a specific review date for each action (when to check if it has been completed)
- Schedule a follow-up review meeting (typically 2-4 weeks after the post-mortem) to verify:
- Immediate actions are complete
- Short-term actions are in progress
- Long-term actions are planned and resourced
- Add action items to the team's backlog or issue tracker
-
Write the artifact — append to
.project/$ARGUMENTS/04-improve.mdunder a## Post-Mortem: [Incident/Event]section:- Incident Summary — blameless description of what happened, when, and impact
- Severity — classification with justification
- Timeline — chronological reconstruction of events
- Root Cause Analysis — 5 Whys chain(s) with root cause identification
- Contributing Factors — factors that made the incident worse or more likely
- What Went Well — positive aspects of detection, response, and resolution
- Corrective Actions — immediate, short-term, and long-term actions with owners and deadlines
- Follow-Up Review — date and agenda for the review meeting
Output
Post-mortem appended to .project/$ARGUMENTS/04-improve.md. Present a summary highlighting:
- Incident summary with severity and duration
- Root cause (one sentence)
- Number of corrective actions by level (immediate, short-term, long-term)
- What went well (top 1-2 positives)
- Follow-up review date
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.