Incident response
Skill SWEStash/swe-workflow-skills/plugins/devops/skills/incident-response
A comprehensive SWE workflow, encoded. Might be useful to you too.
npx -y skills add SWEStash/swe-workflow-skills --skill incident-responseAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 0 stars0 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.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Structured production incident workflow — triage, mitigation, investigation, recovery, comms. Triggers: production is down, site is down, incident, outage, users seeing errors, on-call, alert fired, p0, p1, sev1, sev2, broken in prod, rollback, emergency deploy. For active incidents under time pressure.
SKILL.md
6.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Incident Response
Resolve production incidents quickly and safely. Under pressure, the instinct to jump to fixes causes more harm than good — this workflow keeps the response structured without slowing it down.
⛔ The Iron Law
Mitigate before you investigate; never declare resolved without verification evidence.
Stopping user impact and understanding the cause are separate jobs — don't trade the first for the second. And under pressure, a forward fix you haven't reviewed or verified often creates a second incident: prefer the blunt, reversible mitigation now and confirm recovery with data before declaring the incident over.
Step 1: Triage — Scope and Severity
Spend 2-3 minutes here, not more.
Determine blast radius:
- What is broken? (Specific feature, entire service, dependent services)
- Who is affected? (All users, subset, specific accounts, internal only)
- Is data being lost or corrupted? (If yes: severity immediately escalates)
- Is the issue getting worse over time or stable?
Classify severity:
- Sev1/P0: Complete service outage, data loss, security breach. All hands.
- Sev2/P1: Major feature down, significant user impact, degraded performance at scale.
- Sev3/P2: Minor feature broken, small user subset affected, workaround exists.
If you can't classify yet, treat it as Sev2 until proven otherwise.
Notify the right people now. Don't wait until you understand the problem. People need lead time to join.
See references/severity-levels.md for team-specific escalation paths.
Step 2: Mitigate First — Fix Later
The goal is to stop the bleeding, not to understand it. Mitigation and root cause analysis are separate phases.
Fastest mitigation options (try in order):
- Feature flag off: If the broken code is behind a flag, disable it immediately
- Rollback: If a recent deploy caused this, revert to the previous version
- Traffic shed: Disable the specific endpoint or functionality that's failing
- Circuit breaker / cache: Serve stale data while the live system is broken
- Scale up: If it's a load issue, add capacity before investigating
Apply the first option that will work. Do not spend 20 minutes finding the perfect mitigation — apply the blunt one now, refine later.
Document each action with a timestamp as you go. This builds the post-mortem timeline automatically.
See references/communication-templates.md for status page and stakeholder update templates.
Step 3: Communicate
A brief status update every 15-30 minutes prevents stakeholders from escalating or interrupting responders. Use the template in references/communication-templates.md:
[TIME] Status: [Investigating / Mitigating / Recovering]
Impact: [What is broken, who is affected]
Last action: [What was just done]
Next action: [What's happening next]
ETA: [Best estimate or "unknown"]
Assign one person as the incident commander (coordinates response) and one as the communications lead (external updates). The same person should not do both under pressure.
Step 4: Investigate — Rapid Root Cause
Once mitigation is in place and user impact is reduced, find the root cause.
Apply the binary search from bug-investigating at high speed:
- When did it start? Check deployment logs, config changes, dependency changes in the window before the incident.
- What changed? Compare current state to last-known-good state.
- Reproduce in isolation? Can you trigger the error on a single request/record?
- Trace the error path: Follow the error from symptom back to cause using logs, traces, and metrics.
Time-box investigation phases: 15 minutes to identify the probable cause. If not found, escalate or bring in more people.
Step 5: Recover and Verify
Deploy the fix:
- For rollbacks: verify the previous version is clean, deploy, monitor for 10 minutes
- For forward fixes: code review is still required (even during incidents, a second set of eyes prevents making things worse)
- For config changes: change one variable at a time
Verify recovery:
- Error rate returns to baseline
- Latency returns to normal
- Affected functionality works end-to-end
- No secondary issues (cascading failures, queue backlogs)
Declare the incident resolved with a timestamp. Send a final status update.
Schedule the post-mortem within 48-72 hours while memory is fresh. Use the retrospective skill (incident post-mortem format).
Principles Applied
- KISS: Apply the simplest mitigation first. A blunt rollback that works beats an elegant fix that takes an hour.
- Blameless culture: Incidents are caused by systems, not people. Focus on what the system allowed, not who triggered it.
- Communication over silence: Even "we don't know yet" is better than silence. Stakeholders will escalate if they don't hear anything.
- Separate mitigation from investigation: Stopping user impact and understanding root cause are different work. Don't conflate them.
Rationalizations to reject
Time pressure makes these tempting. Reject them anyway.
| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "Let me find the root cause first" | Every minute investigating is a minute users stay broken. Mitigate first. |
| "I know what's wrong — quick forward fix" | Forward fixes under pressure cause secondary incidents; a rollback is usually faster and safer. |
| "Skip code review, it's an emergency" | A second set of eyes is cheapest exactly when the stakes are highest. |
| "Error rate looks better, call it resolved" | "Looks better" is not baseline. Verify error rate, latency, and end-to-end function. |
| "I'll update people once it's fixed" | Silence makes stakeholders escalate. Send a status even when it's "we don't know yet." |
Red flags — stop and correct course
- Debugging root cause while users are still impacted and no mitigation is live.
- Deploying a forward fix you haven't reviewed.
- Declaring resolved from a single metric or a quick glance.
- No timestamped action log being kept as you go.
Cross-Skill References
rollback-strategy— design safe rollback plans before incidents happenbug-investigating— use for offline root cause analysis after mitigationretrospective— use the incident post-mortem format after the incident resolvesdeployment-checklist— gate future deploys to prevent recurrence
Gives 3 of the 12 instructions most incident response skills give
Counted across 224 of the 224 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- Conduct a blameless postmortem within 48 hourshere, and in 24 of 224, across 14 files
- perform root cause analysis using five whysin 24 of 224, across 20 files
- write a blameless postmortemin 22 of 224, across 19 files
- Update stakeholders every 15 to 30 minuteshere, and in 19 of 224, across 9 files
- assign an owner and due date to every action itemin 18 of 224
- Classify incident severity within 5 minutesin 17 of 224, across 7 files
- Create a post-mortem documentin 17 of 224, across 14 files
- Assign all action items with deadlinesin 14 of 224, across 6 files
- Implement immediate mitigation prioritizing user restorationin 13 of 224, across 3 files
- assign one incident commanderhere, and in 12 of 224
- Stop and ask for clarification if inputs are missingin 10 of 224, across 2 files
- Escalate earlyin 10 of 224, across 2 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Investigate the root cause only after mitigation is live
- Require code review for all forward fixes during incidents
- Change only one configuration variable at a time
- Declare the incident resolved with a final timestamped update
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once.