
Postmortem Writing
FreeCraft blameless postmortems for effective incident reviews.
Free · Opens the source repo
What Postmortem Writing does
The Postmortem Writing skill provides a structured approach to creating effective and blameless postmortem documents. It is designed to help teams conduct thorough incident reviews, focusing on identifying root causes and preventing future incidents. This skill emphasizes a blameless culture, encouraging organizations to learn from failures rather than assigning blame to individuals. By shifting the focus from 'who' to 'what conditions allowed this,' teams can foster an environment of psychological safety where everyone feels comfortable sharing insights and lessons learned.
The skill outlines a clear timeline for postmortem activities, from the initial incident to the finalization of action items. It includes templates and examples for various types of postmortems, such as detailed analyses and quick reviews for minor incidents. These resources help teams document incidents effectively, ensuring that all relevant information is captured and analyzed. Additionally, the skill provides guidance on facilitating postmortem meetings, ensuring that discussions remain productive and focused on learning.
This skill is particularly useful for incident response teams, DevOps engineers, and anyone involved in post-incident reviews. It helps organizations build a culture of continuous improvement by systematically addressing the factors that contribute to incidents. By following the guidelines and templates provided, teams can improve their incident response processes and reduce the likelihood of recurrence.
In summary, the Postmortem Writing skill is an essential tool for organizations looking to enhance their incident management practices. It promotes a blameless approach to learning from failures, ensuring that teams can effectively analyze incidents and implement actionable improvements.
When to use it
Use this skill when conducting post-incident reviews or writing postmortem documents to improve organizational learning.
When not to use it
This skill may not be suitable for situations where a punitive approach to incidents is preferred, or in environments lacking a culture of psychological safety.
What you can build with it
Conducting a Major Incident Review
After a SEV1 incident, use the skill to guide your team through a structured postmortem process, ensuring all aspects are covered.
Facilitating a Blameless Postmortem Meeting
Utilize the meeting structure provided to encourage open discussion and learning among team members, focusing on systemic improvements.
Creating Actionable Follow-Up Items
After identifying root causes, leverage the templates to document specific action items that can prevent future incidents.
How to install Postmortem Writing
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add wshobson/agents/postmortem-writing --agent claude-code2. Or install it manually
Download the skill folder and drop it into ~/.claude/skills/ for all projects, or .claude/skills/ to scope it to one repo. Restart Claude Code so it picks up the new skill.
Anthropic's agentic coding CLI, and the reference implementation of Agent Skills. Drop a skill folder into ~/.claude/skills and Claude Code loads it automatically whenever a task matches the skill's description. Claude Code docs
Inside SKILL.md
Written by wshobsonPostmortem 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.
References
### Template 2: 5 Whys Analysis
```markdown
# 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
Frequently asked questions about Postmortem Writing
Similar skills
Supabase Docs Authoring
Streamline your Supabase documentation process.
Docs Writer
Streamline your documentation process with precision.
Clinical Case Report
Generate structured medical case presentations.
CrossFrame Suite
Streamline complex workflows for Chinese structural analysis.
Em Dash Expert
Master the em dash for clear, precise writing.
Nature Statistics Reporting
Enhance manuscript statistics for high-impact journal submissions.
