postmortem-writer
Creates comprehensive post-incident documents with timeline, root cause analysis, contributing factors, action items, and ownership. Follows SRE best practices for blameless postmortems. Use for "postmortem", "incident review", "RCA", or "post-incident".
What this skill does
# Postmortem Writer
Document incidents for learning and improvement.
## Postmortem Template
```markdown
# Postmortem: API Outage - Database Connection Pool Exhausted
**Date:** 2024-01-15
**Authors:** Jane Doe (On-call), John Smith (DBA)
**Status:** Complete
**Severity:** P1 (Critical)
## Summary
On January 15, 2024, our API experienced a complete outage for 25 minutes (14:32 - 14:57 UTC) affecting 100% of users. The root cause was database connection pool exhaustion triggered by a connection leak introduced in deployment v2.3.4.
**Impact:**
- Duration: 25 minutes
- Users affected: ~50,000
- Requests failed: ~125,000
- Revenue impact: ~$15,000
## Timeline (All times UTC)
| Time | Event |
| ----- | ------------------------------------------------ |
| 14:15 | v2.3.4 deployed to production |
| 14:32 | First CloudWatch alarm: HighErrorRate |
| 14:33 | PagerDuty alert sent to on-call (Jane) |
| 14:35 | Jane acknowledges, begins investigation |
| 14:38 | Identified: Database connection pool at 100% |
| 14:40 | Attempted: Kill long-running queries (no effect) |
| 14:43 | Decision: Rollback to v2.3.3 |
| 14:45 | Rollback initiated |
| 14:47 | Rollback complete, connections dropping |
| 14:50 | Error rate returning to normal |
| 14:57 | All systems recovered, incident closed |
| 15:30 | Postmortem meeting scheduled |
## Root Cause
A code change in v2.3.4 introduced a connection leak in the user profile endpoint. The new caching layer was not properly releasing database connections after queries completed.
**Code diff:**
\`\`\`diff
- await prisma.user.findUnique({ where: { id } });
* const client = await pool.connect();
* const user = await client.query('SELECT \* FROM users WHERE id = $1', [id]);
* // Missing: client.release() ❌
\`\`\`
## Contributing Factors
1. **Insufficient testing:** Load tests didn't catch the leak
- Tests only ran for 5 minutes
- Not enough concurrent connections to exhaust pool
2. **Missing monitoring:** No alerts on connection pool metrics
- Had alarms for query latency
- No alarms for active connections count
3. **Inadequate code review:** Reviewer didn't spot missing release()
- PR approved without running locally
- No checklist for connection management
4. **Deployment process:** No gradual rollout
- Deployed to 100% of production immediately
- No canary deployment
## What Went Well
1. ✅ **Fast detection:** Alert fired within 3 minutes
2. ✅ **Clear runbook:** DBA runbook had exact steps to follow
3. ✅ **Quick decision:** Made rollback decision in 8 minutes
4. ✅ **Communication:** Status page updated every 5 minutes
5. ✅ **Rollback capability:** Automated rollback took <2 minutes
## What Went Wrong
1. ❌ **Code review missed bug:** Connection leak not caught
2. ❌ **Testing gaps:** Load tests insufficient duration
3. ❌ **No canary:** Deployed to all instances at once
4. ❌ **Late detection:** 17 minutes between deploy and alert
## Action Items
| Action | Owner | Due Date | Priority | Status |
| --------------------------------------------- | ------- | ---------- | -------- | -------------- |
| Add connection pool metrics to dashboards | Jane | 2024-01-20 | P0 | ✅ Done |
| Create PR checklist for connection management | John | 2024-01-22 | P0 | ✅ Done |
| Extend load tests to 30 minutes minimum | QA Team | 2024-01-25 | P1 | 🔄 In Progress |
| Implement canary deployment (10% → 100%) | DevOps | 2024-02-01 | P1 | 📋 Planned |
| Add connection leak detection to tests | Jane | 2024-01-27 | P1 | 🔄 In Progress |
| Review all DB connection usage patterns | John | 2024-02-05 | P2 | 📋 Planned |
| Improve alert routing (faster escalation) | DevOps | 2024-02-10 | P2 | 📋 Planned |
## Lessons Learned
1. **Code review checklists work:** Need specific items for common issues
2. **Load tests need realistic duration:** 5min insufficient for leaks
3. **Gradual rollouts catch issues:** 10% canary would have limited impact
4. **Monitoring gaps are dangerous:** Add metrics before you need them
5. **Runbooks save time:** Clear procedures enabled fast response
## Related Incidents
- [2023-11-20] Database CPU spike (similar connection pool issue)
- [2023-08-15] Memory leak in cache layer
## Prevention
To prevent similar incidents:
1. ✅ Add connection management to code review checklist
2. ✅ Monitor connection pool utilization
3. ✅ Extend load test duration
4. ✅ Implement canary deployments
5. ✅ Add automated connection leak detection
## Appendix
### Monitoring Graphs
[Insert graphs of connection pool, error rates, latency during incident]
### Communication Log
[Insert status page updates and customer communication]
### Code Fix
PR #1235: Fix connection leak in user profile endpoint
\`\`\`typescript
const client = await pool.connect();
try {
const user = await client.query('SELECT \* FROM users WHERE id = $1', [id]);
return user;
} finally {
client.release(); // ✅ Always release
}
\`\`\`
```
## Postmortem Best Practices
```markdown
# Blameless Postmortem Guidelines
## Do ✅
- Focus on systems and processes, not people
- Use timeline with exact timestamps
- Identify contributing factors, not just root cause
- Create actionable items with owners and dates
- Document what went well (positive reinforcement)
- Share widely for organizational learning
## Don't ❌
- Blame individuals or teams
- Hide or minimize the incident
- Skip the postmortem (even for small incidents)
- Create action items without owners
- Forget to follow up on action items
- Make it a blame session
## Template Sections
1. **Summary** (2-3 sentences)
2. **Impact** (numbers: users, revenue, duration)
3. **Timeline** (chronological events)
4. **Root Cause** (technical explanation)
5. **Contributing Factors** (broader context)
6. **What Went Well** (positive reinforcement)
7. **What Went Wrong** (improvement areas)
8. **Action Items** (concrete, owned, dated)
9. **Lessons Learned** (key takeaways)
```
## Output Checklist
- [ ] Timeline created
- [ ] Root cause identified
- [ ] Contributing factors documented
- [ ] Action items with owners
- [ ] Lessons learned captured
- [ ] Postmortem meeting held
- [ ] Document shared widely
- [ ] Follow-up scheduled
ENDFILE
Related in Code Review
gstack
IncludedFast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)
startup-due-diligence
IncludedLegal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.
interview-master
IncludedThis skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.
fix-issue
IncludedFixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.
sf-apex
IncludedGenerates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.
swift-development
IncludedComprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.