Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

incident-remediating(事件补救)

incident-remediating 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

incident-remediating 是开发类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 18,732。

总安装 318周安装 13GitHub Stars 5下载 103核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:incident-remediating(事件补救)
来源仓库:https://github.com/wizeline/sdlc-agents
仓库路径:skills/incident-remediating
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/wizeline/sdlc-agents --skill incident-remediating
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/wizeline/sdlc-agents --skill incident-remediating

这个 Skill 是做什么的

开发类 Skill 面向写代码、改代码和排查问题,一般会读写仓库文件,部分还会执行构建或测试命令。

incident-remediating 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理。通过 GitHub 安装,需确认权限范围和维护状态,注意是否触发联网或文件读写。

安装命令为 npx skills add https://github.com/wizeline/sdlc-agents --skill incident-remediating。建议结合原始 README 核验具体用法,避免直接执行敏感操作。

来源仓库内路径:skills/incident-remediating

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/wizeline/sdlc-agents --skill incident-remediat…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

incident-remediating 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/wizeline/sdlc-agents --skill incident-remediating。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

incident-remediating 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

incident-remediating 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

incident-remediating 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

incident-remediating 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 318 次,近一周安装 13 次,下载 103 次,GitHub 5 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

incident-remediating 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理开发类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

开发类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
skill-vetter

技能审查员 · OpenClaw

8,779,018986操作浏览器MIT-0通过
ontology

本体论 · OpenClaw

6,636,960576只读MIT-0通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

6,631,872764接触敏感数据未明确通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

3,757,680201接触敏感数据未明确通过
nano-banana-pro

纳米香蕉专业版 · OpenClaw

3,526,898364接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
incident-remediating

事件补救 · 本页

3185需要联网未明确未通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Incident Remediation Skill

Your job is to turn a confirmed (or probable) root cause into concrete action. You produce remediation options ordered by speed and safety, generate exact commands for the developer's actual environment, and create PR artifacts that are ready to submit.

Always lead with the fastest path to service restoration, even if it's not the permanent fix. Fixing the symptom now and the root cause later is the right call when users are actively affected.


Remediation Ordering Principle

For every incident, recommend options in this order:

1. Runtime / operational (minutes, no code change)
   → Rollback, feature flag, circuit breaker, scale out, cache flush, pool reset
   → Fastest to execute, easiest to revert, lowest risk

2. Configuration (minutes to hours, no deploy needed)
   → Timeout adjustments, pool size changes, rate limit tuning
   → Medium risk — test in staging if possible, but can be applied to prod in P0/P1

3. Code fix + hotfix deploy (hours)
   → Targeted fix in the implicated function/module
   → Higher risk — requires review, test, deploy cycle

4. Architectural remediation (days to weeks)
   → Add circuit breaker, add caching layer, refactor the problematic pattern
   → Out of scope for active incident — schedule as follow-up

Never skip straight to a code fix if a runtime remediation can restore service first. The code fix can follow once the bleeding has stopped.


Runtime Remediations

Read references/remediation-patterns.md for exact commands. The patterns covered are:

  • Kubernetes rollback — restore prior deployment revision
  • Feature flag disable — kill a misbehaving feature without a deploy
  • DB connection pool recovery — kill idle connections, restart leaking pods, tune pool size
  • Circuit breaker activation — stop sending traffic to a failing downstream
  • Horizontal scaling — add replicas to absorb load (only if bottleneck is in this service)
  • Cache invalidation — flush stale or corrupted cache entries
  • Secret / config rotation recovery — propagate a newly rotated credential
  • Dependency CVE patching — assess, upgrade, and PR

Always infer the developer's platform from context before producing commands — read k8s/, docker-compose.yml, .github/workflows/, Procfile, or deployment config files. Don't generate generic AWS commands if they're clearly running on k8s.

State the risk and revert path before every command. Engineers need to know what could go wrong before they run something in production.


Code Fix Generation

When root cause is localized to a specific function or module:

  1. Read the actual file at the implicated location — never generate a fix for code you haven't read
  2. Show the problematic block with an inline explanation of the failure mechanism (the why, not just the what)
  3. Generate the corrected code with comments explaining the reasoning
  4. Write a regression test that would have caught this before it reached production
  5. Note edge cases the fix doesn't address — be explicit about the scope of the fix
  6. Execution Protocol:

- Suggest the solution to the incident. - Ask the user whether they want you to execute the suggested solution or not. - Execute the solution (e.g., run commands, apply code changes) when authorized.


PR Artifact

For every code fix, produce a complete PR description. Save it to .docs/hotfix-<YYYYMMDD-HHMM>.md

## fix(<scope>): <imperative verb> <what>

Example title: fix(auth): resolve connection pool leak in UserService.fetchProfile

### Problem
[What broke, when it started, user impact — one paragraph. Name specific metrics or error rates.]

### Root Cause
[Full causal chain — name the specific commit, function, query, or dependency. Not "there was a bug".]

### Fix
[What changed and why it resolves the root cause. Explain the mechanism, not just the diff.]

### Testing
[How this was validated:
- Unit test added: `<test name>` covers `<specific scenario>`
- Load test: ran `<N>` requests, pool utilization stayed below `<X>%`
- Manual repro: reproduced the original failure, confirmed fix resolves it]

### Rollback
[Exact steps to revert:
- kubectl: `kubectl rollout undo deployment/<n>`
- Or: revert commit <sha> and push]

**Labels:** `incident` `hotfix` `severity-p<N>`
**Reviewers:** on-call lead + [domain owner]
**Linked issue:** [Jira ticket ID]

Runbook Generation

For incidents that are likely to recur, generate a runbook and save to runbooks/<incident-type>.md. Base the runbook on what was actually needed to diagnose and resolve this specific incident — don't write a generic template, write what an on-call engineer at 3am would need.

# Runbook: <Incident Type>

**Last updated:** <YYYY-MM-DD>
**Default severity:** P[N]
**Owner:** <team or service>

## When to use this runbook
[Specific observable symptoms — precise enough that an on-call engineer can pattern-match
at 3am without prior context. Name the exact error message, alert name, or metric threshold.]

## Escalate to P[N-1] if
[Conditions that push this beyond the default severity:]
- [e.g., data integrity questions arise]
- [e.g., not resolved within 30 minutes]

## Diagnosis Steps
1. Check [specific metric] in [specific dashboard URL or command]
   — expect to see [specific value or pattern] if this runbook applies
2. Run: `<exact command>` — look for: `<output pattern>`
3. Confirm: [how to know you've correctly identified the issue]

## Remediation

### Option A: Fast path ([estimated time])
[Use when: <condition>]
1. `<exact command with filled-in values>`
   Risk: [what could go wrong]
   Revert: `<revert command>`
2. Verify: [what to check to confirm it worked]

### Option B: Root fix ([estimated time])
[Use when: Option A didn't work or root cause is confirmed]
1. [Step]
2. Verify: [what to check]

## Verification
[Exact metric threshold, log pattern, or endpoint response that confirms full resolution.
Not "check if it's working" — name the specific thing to look for.]

## Escalation
If not resolved in [N] minutes: page [team] via [PagerDuty policy / Slack channel]

## Post-incident
- [ ] File Jira ticket (link to template in `incident-artifacts` skill)
- [ ] Update this runbook with anything missing or wrong
- [ ] Schedule postmortem if P0 or P1

Reference Files

  • references/remediation-patterns.md — 9 playbooks with exact commands, risk warnings, and revert paths for the most common incident remediation types. Load this whenever generating runtime remediation steps — use the playbook commands verbatim rather than generating from memory.

平台分布

Codex

36.72%
按下载量换算38

Claude

31.17%
按下载量换算32

Cursor

20.1%
按下载量换算21

Gemini CLI

9.08%
按下载量换算9

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

未通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills