Skills wshobson agents

postmortem-writing

Use it when:
You're writing a postmortem after an incident, or running the review meeting.
It does:
Frames the review as blameless — what conditions allowed the failure, not who caused it — and gives templates and a 5 Whys structure.
You get:
A postmortem with an executive summary, UTC timeline, root-cause analysis, impact, lessons and a prioritized action-item table with owners and tickets.
Also has:
A meeting facilitation guide and a table of anti-patterns (blame, shallow analysis, no action items, no follow-up).

TL;DR

A guide to writing postmortems that drive learning rather than blame. The SKILL.md contrasts blame-focused with blameless framing, lists what triggers a postmortem (SEV1/SEV2, customer outages over 15 minutes, data loss, near-misses, novel failures), and gives a rough timeline from incident to quarterly pattern review. A reference file holds a full standard template worked through a payment-service outage — summary, timeline, root-cause with a 5 Whys chain, detection, response, impact, lessons and action items — plus a 5 Whys template and a quick template for minor incidents. The SKILL.md adds a 60-minute meeting structure, facilitation tips (redirect blame to systems, document dissent, time-box tangents), an anti-patterns table, and do's and don'ts: start immediately, be specific, assign owners, share widely, never name and shame, don't skip small incidents or follow-up. It points to the runbook and on-call-handoff skills.

Summarizes the skill at 4bde316.

npx skills add https://github.com/wshobson/agents --skill postmortem-writing
Total Downloads
11,200 on skills.sh, Nov 9, 2026
Repo stars
42,334 wshobson/agents
First seen
Jan 20, 2026 on skills.sh
Weekly Downloads
164
-15% over the 8 weeks to Nov 9
Weekly values
Week toInstalls
Sep 21194
Sep 28224
Oct 5289
Oct 12241
Oct 19204
Oct 26193
Nov 2198
Nov 9164
Category

Articles, docs, internal comms, research write-ups and prose that doesn't read as generated.

Deploy, provision, observe and debug cloud apps.

Everything for building software: planning, coding, debugging, design, frameworks, cloud, agents and skills.

Type

Knowledge and rules the agent applies while it works: best practices, design principles, API references.

Effect

Adds no side effects of its own. It shapes how the agent thinks, writes or reviews. Guidelines and routers are always effect:none, even when the task they support edits code.

Needs

Instructions only. Works in any agent that supports skills.

Publisher

Everyone else. Unverified vendor claims default to community.

Topics

SKILL.md

From wshobson/agents at 4bde316. Checked daily, last changed Nov 6, 2026.

Frontmatter
name: postmortem-writing
description: Write effective blameless postmortems with root cause analysis, timelines, and action items. Use when conducting incident reviews, writing postmortem documents, or improving incident response processes.

Postmortem Writing

Comprehensive guide to writing effective, blameless postmortems that drive organizational learning and prevent incident recurrence.

When to Use This Skill

  • Conducting post-incident reviews
  • Writing postmortem documents
  • Facilitating blameless postmortem meetings
  • Identifying root causes and contributing factors
  • Creating actionable follow-up items
  • Building organizational learning culture

Core Concepts

1. Blameless Culture
Blame-Focused Blameless
"Who caused this?" "What conditions allowed this?"
"Someone made a mistake" "The system allowed this mistake"
Punish individuals Improve systems
Hide information Share learnings
Fear of speaking up Psychological safety
2. Postmortem Triggers
  • SEV1 or SEV2 incidents
  • Customer-facing outages > 15 minutes
  • Data loss or security incidents
  • Near-misses that could have been severe
  • Novel failure modes
  • Incidents requiring unusual intervention

Quick Start

Postmortem Timeline
Day 0: Incident occurs
Day 1-2: Draft postmortem document
Day 3-5: Postmortem meeting
Day 5-7: Finalize document, create tickets
Week 2+: Action item completion
Quarterly: Review patterns across incidents

Templates and detailed worked examples

Full template library and detailed worked examples live in references/details.md. Read that file when you need the concrete templates.

Template 2: 5 Whys Analysis
# 5 Whys Analysis: [Incident]

## Problem Statement

Payment service experienced 47-minute outage due to database connection exhaustion.

## Analysis

### Why #1: Why did the service fail?

**Answer**: Database connections were exhausted, causing all new requests to fail.

**Evidence**: Metrics showed connection count at 100/100 (max), with 500+ pending requests.

---

### Why #2: Why were database connections exhausted?

**Answer**: Each incoming request opened a new database connection instead of using the connection pool.

**Evidence**: Code diff shows direct `DriverManager.getConnection()` instead of pooled `DataSource`.

---

### Why #3: Why did the code bypass the connection pool?

**Answer**: A developer refactored the repository class and inadvertently changed the connection acquisition method.

**Evidence**: PR #1234 shows the change, made while fixing a different bug.

---

### Why #4: Why wasn't this caught in code review?

**Answer**: The reviewer focused on the functional change (the bug fix) and didn't notice the infrastructure change.

**Evidence**: Review comments only discuss business logic.

---

### Why #5: Why isn't there a safety net for this type of change?

**Answer**: We lack automated tests that verify connection pool behavior and lack documentation about our connection patterns.

**Evidence**: Test suite has no tests for connection handling; wiki has no article on database connections.

## Root Causes Identified

1. **Primary**: Missing automated tests for infrastructure behavior
2. **Secondary**: Insufficient documentation of architectural patterns
3. **Tertiary**: Code review checklist doesn't include infrastructure considerations

## Systemic Improvements

| Root Cause    | Improvement                       | Type       |
| ------------- | --------------------------------- | ---------- |
| Missing tests | Add infrastructure behavior tests | Prevention |
| Missing docs  | Document connection patterns      | Prevention |
| Review gaps   | Update review checklist           | Detection  |
| No canary     | Implement canary deployments      | Mitigation |
Template 3: Quick Postmortem (Minor Incidents)
# Quick Postmortem: [Brief Title]

**Date**: 2024-01-15 | **Duration**: 12 min | **Severity**: SEV3

## What Happened

API latency spiked to 5s due to cache miss storm after cache flush.

## Timeline

- 10:00 - Cache flush initiated for config update
- 10:02 - Latency alerts fire
- 10:05 - Identified as cache miss storm
- 10:08 - Enabled cache warming
- 10:12 - Latency normalized

## Root Cause

Full cache flush for minor config update caused thundering herd.

## Fix

- Immediate: Enabled cache warming
- Long-term: Implement partial cache invalidation (ENG-999)

## Lessons

Don't full-flush cache in production; use targeted invalidation.

Facilitation Guide

Running a Postmortem Meeting
## Meeting Structure (60 minutes)

### 1. Opening (5 min)

- Remind everyone of blameless culture
- "We're here to learn, not to blame"
- Review meeting norms

### 2. Timeline Review (15 min)

- Walk through events chronologically
- Ask clarifying questions
- Identify gaps in timeline

### 3. Analysis Discussion (20 min)

- What failed?
- Why did it fail?
- What conditions allowed this?
- What would have prevented it?

### 4. Action Items (15 min)

- Brainstorm improvements
- Prioritize by impact and effort
- Assign owners and due dates

### 5. Closing (5 min)

- Summarize key learnings
- Confirm action item owners
- Schedule follow-up if needed

## Facilitation Tips

- Keep discussion on track
- Redirect blame to systems
- Encourage quiet participants
- Document dissenting views
- Time-box tangents

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Anti-Pattern Problem Better Approach
Blame game Shuts down learning Focus on systems
Shallow analysis Doesn't prevent recurrence Ask "why" 5 times
No action items Waste of time Always have concrete next steps
Unrealistic actions Never completed Scope to achievable tasks
No follow-up Actions forgotten Track in ticketing system

Best Practices

Do's
  • Start immediately - Memory fades fast
  • Be specific - Exact times, exact errors
  • Include graphs - Visual evidence
  • Assign owners - No orphan action items
  • Share widely - Organizational learning
Don'ts
  • Don't name and shame - Ever
  • Don't skip small incidents - They reveal patterns
  • Don't make it a blame doc - That kills learning
  • Don't create busywork - Actions should be meaningful
  • Don't skip follow-up - Verify actions completed