CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

wagneripjr/postmortem

Write a production-incident postmortem that reads well for humans and stays parseable by tooling: machine-read frontmatter, a numbered spine, and strict evidence rules

72

Quality

90%

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

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The content is a well-structured, actionable instruction-only skill with clear sequencing, explicit discipline checkpoints, and appropriate offloading of fillable templates to two real reference files. It is efficient but slightly discursive in places, and validation is framed as rules rather than runnable feedback loops.

Suggestions

Trim a few editorial rationale sentences (e.g. 'the single most damaging lie a postmortem can tell') to tighten conciseness without losing the anti-pattern signal.

Inline one small filled-in example (e.g. a sample impact/blast-radius table row or a frontmatter instance) so the most common sections are copy-paste ready without opening the template.

Make the verification step more explicit as a feedback loop — e.g. a short 'before committing: confirm every number cites a source, the finding-id is frozen, and action items have owners' checklist.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is largely lean and assumes Claude's competence — it explains postmortem discipline and anti-patterns rather than generic concepts — but a few rationale sentences ('the single most damaging lie a postmortem can tell', telemetry-retention editorializing) could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete guidance throughout: exact path format, a YAML frontmatter block, a severity enum with mapping table, and per-section discipline (mechanism-not-symptom, 5 whys, discarded hypotheses, palliative vs root fix); the gap is that filled-in examples live in the referenced templates rather than inline.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear ordered spine runs from 'when to write' through 11 numbered sections to 'after writing', with discipline checkpoints (cite every source, freeze the finding-id, label hypotheses); validation is rule-based rather than a runnable validate-fix-retry loop, leaving a minor gap.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is an overview that clearly signals two real one-level-deep reference templates (full-template.md, quick-template.md), with the fillable structure offloaded to them; the minor gap is that the 11-section discipline is fully inlined rather than partly deferred to those templates.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%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 is exemplary: concrete, comprehensive, third-person, and supplies explicit trigger phrases plus anti-triggers. It clearly answers what the skill does and when to invoke it with minimal conflict risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete outputs and actions — a fixed file path, YAML frontmatter with a severity enum, a finding-id derived from H1+date, and a numbered spine enumerating ~12 named sections — giving comprehensive coverage rather than vague abstraction.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both 'what' (produces a structured, tooling-parseable postmortem with an enumerated spine) and 'when' (concrete trigger phrases and right-after-mitigation timing), with anti-triggers sharpening the when.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

An explicit 'Triggers:' block supplies natural phrases users would say ('write a postmortem', 'post-incident review', 'RCA document', 'document this outage') plus a situational condition, covering synonyms and common variations.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Occupies a clear niche (production-incident postmortem) and three explicit 'NOT for' clauses (bug reports, live incident response, decision reconciliation) minimize overlap with adjacent skills.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents