CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

incident-responder

Expert SRE incident responder specializing in rapid problem resolution, modern observability, and comprehensive incident management.

34

Quality

29%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/incident-responder/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is incident-responder in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

23%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill is a comprehensive but extremely verbose SRE incident response reference that reads more like a knowledge base article than an actionable skill for Claude. It extensively explains concepts Claude already knows (severity levels, SRE principles, observability tools) without providing concrete, executable guidance. The content would benefit enormously from aggressive trimming and splitting into focused reference files.

Suggestions

Reduce the body to under 80 lines by removing sections Claude already knows (behavioral traits, response principles, tool listings, SRE best practices) and focus only on the specific workflow and decision framework unique to this skill.

Add concrete, executable examples: specific CLI commands for common diagnostic steps (e.g., kubectl commands, curl health checks, Prometheus queries) rather than just naming tools.

Split detailed content (severity classification, communication templates, post-mortem templates, tool integration details) into separate bundle files and reference them with clear one-level-deep links.

Add explicit validation checkpoints with concrete criteria, e.g., 'Confirm SLIs are within threshold for 15 minutes before declaring resolution' rather than vague 'Service health checks'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~250+ lines, extensively explaining SRE concepts, incident management frameworks, severity classifications, and behavioral traits that Claude already knows. The content reads like a textbook chapter rather than a skill file. Sections like 'Behavioral Traits', 'Response Principles', 'Purpose', and extensive tool listings add no actionable value beyond what Claude inherently understands.

1 / 5

Actionability

The skill provides high-level checklists and bullet points but no concrete, executable code, commands, or specific tool invocations. Everything remains at the level of 'use Prometheus' or 'check circuit breaker states' without showing how. There are no runnable scripts, specific CLI commands, or copy-paste ready examples.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

There is a rough temporal sequence (first 5 minutes → investigation → resolution → post-incident), and the Fix Implementation section has numbered steps. However, validation checkpoints are vague ('Validation: Service health checks'), there are no explicit feedback loops for error recovery, and the workflow lacks concrete decision gates or conditional branching.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references `resources/implementation-playbook.md` but no bundle files are provided, making this reference unverifiable and potentially broken. The massive amount of content is inlined as a monolithic document with no meaningful splitting into separate reference files. Content like severity classifications, tool listings, and SRE best practices should be in separate files.

2 / 5

Total

8

/

20

Passed

Description

36%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description relies heavily on buzzwords ('rapid problem resolution', 'modern observability', 'comprehensive incident management') without specifying concrete actions or when the skill should be triggered. It identifies the SRE domain but lacks the specificity and completeness needed for Claude to reliably select it from a large skill set. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause is a significant gap.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger phrases such as 'Use when the user mentions incidents, outages, alerts, on-call, postmortems, or SRE troubleshooting'.

Replace abstract phrases like 'rapid problem resolution' and 'modern observability' with specific actions such as 'triages production alerts, analyzes logs and metrics, writes postmortem reports, creates runbooks'.

Include natural synonyms and related terms users would say, such as 'outage', 'downtime', 'pager', 'monitoring', 'error budget', 'SLO/SLA' to improve trigger term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (SRE incident response) but actions are vague — 'rapid problem resolution', 'modern observability', and 'comprehensive incident management' are abstract buzzwords rather than concrete actions like 'analyzes logs', 'creates runbooks', or 'triages alerts'.

2 / 5

Completeness

Provides a vague 'what' (incident response, observability, incident management) but has no 'when' clause at all. There is no explicit guidance on when Claude should select this skill, which caps this dimension per the rubric guidelines.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some relevant keywords like 'SRE', 'incident', 'observability', and 'incident management' that users might naturally use, but misses common variations and specific terms like 'on-call', 'alert', 'postmortem', 'runbook', 'outage', 'downtime', 'pager', or 'monitoring'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The SRE domain narrows it somewhat, but terms like 'observability' and 'incident management' are broad enough to overlap with monitoring skills, DevOps skills, or general troubleshooting skills. Without specific triggers, conflict risk remains moderate.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.