incident-responder

Expert SRE incident responder specializing in rapid problem resolution, modern observability, and comprehensive incident management. Masters incident command, blameless post-mortems, error budget management, and system reliability patterns. Handles critical outages, communication strategies, and continuous improvement. Use IMMEDIATELY for production incidents or SRE practices.

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/incident-responder/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

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

A comprehensive, well-structured incident-response playbook that is let down by verbosity, encyclopedic restatement of familiar SRE concepts, and a lack of executable runbook steps or progressive disclosure. The workflow sequencing is sound but would benefit from explicit validation feedback loops and offloaded reference material.

Suggestions

Cut definitional bullets for well-known concepts (circuit breakers, bulkhead, five whys) and familiar tool lists; keep only operational guidance Claude would not already infer.

Add concrete, executable runbook steps or commands for stabilization and validation instead of abstract category checklists.

Move the severity-classification matrix, tools catalog, and post-mortem template into separate reference files linked from a concise overview to improve progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~200-line body is mostly useful operational guidance, but it spends many bullets defining SRE concepts Claude already knows (circuit breakers, bulkhead pattern, five whys, fishbone diagrams) and listing familiar tools (PagerDuty, Prometheus, Grafana), so it could be tightened considerably.	2 / 3
Actionability	Concrete specifics exist — SLA thresholds ('< 15 minutes acknowledgment'), update cadence ('Every 15 minutes'), and named roles — but most sections are abstract category lists ('User impact: Affected user count, geographic distribution') rather than executable procedures or runbook commands.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear overall sequence is present (Immediate Actions → Investigation → Resolution → Post-Incident) with numbered fix steps and a Recovery Validation checkpoint, but explicit validate-then-fix-then-retry feedback loops are largely implicit rather than spelled out.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well organized, but the skill is a monolithic ~200-line document with no bundle files; content like the severity matrix, tool catalog, and post-mortem template is inline when it could be split into one-level-deep references.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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

A strong description with an explicit trigger and a well-defined niche, weakened mainly by buzzword padding and over-claims ('Masters', 'comprehensive', 'modern') that reduce specificity. It clearly answers both what the skill does and when to use it.

Suggestions

Trim over-claims and filler words ('Masters', 'comprehensive', 'modern observability') in favor of concrete, verifiable actions.

Broaden the explicit trigger clause beyond 'production incidents or SRE practices' to include natural variants like 'outages', 'on-call', and 'post-mortems'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete capabilities ('incident command, blameless post-mortems, error budget management', 'critical outages, communication strategies'), but pads them with buzzwords and over-claims like 'Masters', 'comprehensive', and 'modern observability' that the rubric penalizes.	2 / 3
Completeness	Clearly states what the skill does (SRE incident response capabilities) and provides an explicit when clause ('Use IMMEDIATELY for production incidents or SRE practices'), satisfying both what and when.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms a user would say during an outage — 'production incidents', 'SRE practices', 'critical outages', 'post-mortems' — giving good coverage of likely trigger phrasing.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear SRE incident-response niche with distinct triggers ('production incidents', 'SRE practices'), making it unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/incident-responder/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

Reviewed: about 23 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.