CD flow-incident-response
Orchestrate production incident triage, escalation, resolution, and post-incident review using ITIL best practices
Orchestrate production incident triage, escalation, resolution, and post-incident review using ITIL best practices
As a process D 46/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: templates/support/incident-response-runbook-template.md, templates/support/escalation-matrix-template.md, templates/support/post-incident-review-template.md
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 16881 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/support/incident-response-runbook-template.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/support/escalation-matrix-template.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/support/post-incident-review-template.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/deployment/operational-readiness-review-template.md - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "namespace" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "commandHint" - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 359, 1064): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 46/100
- 0Tools and files. 4 referenced file(s) missing: templates/support/incident-response-runbook-template.md, templates/support/escalation-matrix-template.md, templates/support/post-incident-review-template.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 10Execution cost. Instruction body is 16881 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 30Running it twice. 17 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 121 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 15 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Description length 114: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 26 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 121 items
- +4Has examples (48 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 45.