incident-postmortem-template
Incident Postmortem Template - Auto-activating skill for Technical Documentation. Triggers on: incident postmortem template, incident postmortem template Part of the Technical Documentation skill category.
36
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.02xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/17-technical-docs/incident-postmortem-template/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
7%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is extremely thin—it essentially just names the skill and repeats the same trigger phrase twice without describing any concrete capabilities or providing meaningful trigger guidance. It reads more like a placeholder than a functional skill description, offering almost no information for Claude to make an informed selection decision.
Suggestions
Add specific actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Generates structured incident postmortem documents including timeline, root cause analysis, impact assessment, and action items.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with diverse trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to create a postmortem, post-incident review, outage report, RCA document, or incident retrospective.'
Expand trigger terms to include natural variations users would say: 'postmortem', 'post-mortem', 'incident review', 'outage analysis', 'root cause analysis', 'RCA', 'incident retrospective', 'blameless retro'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names a domain ('incident postmortem template') but does not describe any concrete actions. There are no verbs indicating what the skill actually does—no 'generates', 'creates', 'fills out', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description barely addresses 'what' (it's about an incident postmortem template, but no actions are specified) and the 'when' is essentially just restating the skill name as a trigger. There is no explicit 'Use when...' clause with meaningful guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms listed are just 'incident postmortem template' repeated twice. There are no natural variations a user might say, such as 'post-incident review', 'outage report', 'RCA template', 'root cause analysis', or 'incident report'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The phrase 'incident postmortem template' is fairly specific to a niche domain, which reduces conflict risk somewhat. However, the lack of concrete actions and the generic 'Technical Documentation' category label could cause overlap with other documentation skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is essentially a placeholder with no actual content. It repeatedly describes itself in abstract terms without providing any postmortem template, structure, fields, examples, or actionable guidance. It fails on every dimension because it contains zero instructional or reference material.
Suggestions
Replace the entire body with an actual incident postmortem template including sections like Summary, Timeline, Root Cause, Impact, Action Items, and Lessons Learned with concrete field descriptions.
Add a concrete example of a filled-out postmortem (even a brief one) so Claude knows the expected output format and level of detail.
Include a clear workflow: 1. Gather incident details, 2. Fill timeline, 3. Identify root cause, 4. Define action items, 5. Review with stakeholders—with validation checkpoints.
Remove all meta-description sections (Purpose, When to Use, Capabilities, Example Triggers) and replace with actionable content that teaches Claude how to generate quality postmortems.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and meta-description. It explains what the skill does in abstract terms without providing any actual postmortem template, structure, or actionable content. Every section restates the same vague information. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete guidance—no template, no example postmortem structure, no fields to fill in, no commands, no code. It only describes what it could do rather than actually doing or instructing anything. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined. There are no steps for creating a postmortem, no sequencing, and no validation checkpoints. The 'step-by-step guidance' mentioned in Capabilities is never actually provided. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content has section headers but they contain no substantive information. There are no references to detailed files, no template files linked, and the sections are repetitive rather than progressively disclosing useful content. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
b8a3b3e
- 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.