anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins

incident-response

Run an incident response workflow — triage, communicate, and write postmortem.

ソースを見る

使い方

  1. インストールコマンドをコピーし、自分の環境へ導入する前にソースを確認します。
  2. 必要なツール、認証情報、対応環境を原文で確認します。
  3. 入力と成果物を指定し、出力を資料と照合します。
npx skills add https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill incident-response

開始前の確認

  • 導入にはモデル契約、API枠、ファイルへのアクセス許可は含まれません。
  • スター数や導入数は活動の指標であり、独立した品質・安全性試験ではありません。
リポジトリの原文

見出し、例、コード、表、リンク、参照画像を含む原文を表示しています。

/incident-response

If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.

Manage an incident from detection through postmortem.

Usage

/incident-response $ARGUMENTS

Modes

/incident-response new [description]     # Start a new incident
/incident-response update [status]       # Post a status update
/incident-response postmortem            # Generate postmortem from incident data

If no mode is specified, ask what phase the incident is in.

How It Works

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    INCIDENT RESPONSE                               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  Phase 1: TRIAGE                                                  │
│  ✓ Assess severity (SEV1-4)                                     │
│  ✓ Identify affected systems and users                          │
│  ✓ Assign roles (IC, comms, responders)                         │
│                                                                    │
│  Phase 2: COMMUNICATE                                              │
│  ✓ Draft internal status update                                  │
│  ✓ Draft customer communication (if needed)                     │
│  ✓ Set up war room and cadence                                   │
│                                                                    │
│  Phase 3: MITIGATE                                                 │
│  ✓ Document mitigation steps taken                               │
│  ✓ Track timeline of events                                      │
│  ✓ Confirm resolution                                            │
│                                                                    │
│  Phase 4: POSTMORTEM                                               │
│  ✓ Blameless postmortem document                                 │
│  ✓ Timeline reconstruction                                       │
│  ✓ Root cause analysis (5 whys)                                  │
│  ✓ Action items with owners                                      │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Severity Classification

LevelCriteriaResponse Time
SEV1Service down, all users affectedImmediate, all-hands
SEV2Major feature degraded, many users affectedWithin 15 min
SEV3Minor feature issue, some users affectedWithin 1 hour
SEV4Cosmetic or low-impact issueNext business day

Communication Guidance

Provide clear, factual updates at regular cadence. Include: what's happening, who's affected, what we're doing, when the next update is.

Output — Status Update

markdown
## Incident Update: [Title]
**Severity:** SEV[1-4] | **Status:** Investigating | Identified | Monitoring | Resolved
**Impact:** [Who/what is affected]
**Last Updated:** [Timestamp]

### Current Status
[What we know now]

### Actions Taken
- [Action 1]
- [Action 2]

### Next Steps
- [What's happening next and ETA]

### Timeline
| Time | Event |
|------|-------|
| [HH:MM] | [Event] |

Output — Postmortem

markdown
## Postmortem: [Incident Title]
**Date:** [Date] | **Duration:** [X hours] | **Severity:** SEV[X]
**Authors:** [Names] | **Status:** Draft

### Summary
[2-3 sentence plain-language summary]

### Impact
- [Users affected]
- [Duration of impact]
- [Business impact if quantifiable]

### Timeline
| Time (UTC) | Event |
|------------|-------|
| [HH:MM] | [Event] |

### Root Cause
[Detailed explanation of what caused the incident]

### 5 Whys
1. Why did [symptom]? → [Because...]
2. Why did [cause 1]? → [Because...]
3. Why did [cause 2]? → [Because...]
4. Why did [cause 3]? → [Because...]
5. Why did [cause 4]? → [Root cause]

### What Went Well
- [Things that worked]

### What Went Poorly
- [Things that didn't work]

### Action Items
| Action | Owner | Priority | Due Date |
|--------|-------|----------|----------|
| [Action] | [Person] | P0/P1/P2 | [Date] |

### Lessons Learned
[Key takeaways for the team]

If Connectors Available

If ~~monitoring is connected:

  • Pull alert details and metrics
  • Show graphs of affected metrics

If ~~incident management is connected:

  • Create or update incident in PagerDuty/Opsgenie
  • Page on-call responders

If ~~chat is connected:

  • Post status updates to incident channel
  • Create war room channel

Tips

  1. Start writing immediately — Don't wait for complete information. Update as you learn more.
  2. Keep updates factual — What we know, what we've done, what's next. No speculation.
  3. Postmortems are blameless — Focus on systems and processes, not individuals.

タスクに関連する項目

同じリポジトリから

関連する Skills

すべての Skills
anthropics
公式

testing-strategy

Design test strategies and test plans. Trigger with "how should we test", "test strategy for", "write tests for", "test plan", "what tests do we need", or when the user needs help with testing approaches, coverage, or test architecture.

1時間の導入数
1
GitHub Stars
3.4万
更新日
10月31日
anthropics
公式

create-viz

Create publication-quality visualizations with Python. Use when turning query results or a DataFrame into a chart, selecting the right chart type for a trend or comparison, generating a plot for a report or presentation, or needing an interactive chart with hover and zoom.

1時間の導入数
4
GitHub Stars
3.4万
更新日
10月29日
anthropics
公式

data-visualization

Create effective data visualizations with Python (matplotlib, seaborn, plotly). Use when building charts, choosing the right chart type for a dataset, creating publication-quality figures, or applying design principles like accessibility and color theory.

1時間の導入数
6
GitHub Stars
3.4万
更新日
10月29日
anthropics
公式

brand-review

Review content against your brand voice, style guide, and messaging pillars, flagging deviations by severity with specific before/after fixes. Use when checking a draft before it ships, when auditing copy for voice consistency and terminology, or when screening for unsubstantiated claims, missing disclaimers, and other legal flags.

1時間の導入数
2
GitHub Stars
3.3万
更新日
10月24日