Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 运维

kubernetes-triage-expert(Kubernetes triage expert 部署)

用于辅助云资源、部署、容器、基础设施和运维自动化任务。它适合让 Agent 检查配置、整理部署步骤、分析资源状态、生成排障思路或辅助云服务接入。使用时需要明确目标环境、账号权限、区域和资源组,区分本地测试与生产操作;涉及删除资源、重启服务、修改网络或权限配置时,应先确认影响范围。

kubernetes-triage-expert 是运维类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为执行命令;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在运维类的 954 个 Skill 里排第 812。

总安装 2,840周安装 116GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 919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
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

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:kubernetes-triage-expert(Kubernetes triage expert 部署)
来源仓库:https://github.com/ghostwritten/kubernetes-triage-expert
安装命令:
openclaw skills install kubernetes-triage-expert
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install kubernetes-triage-expert

这个 Skill 是做什么的

运维类 Skill 处理部署、监控、日志和云资源,多数需要较高的执行权限。

专用于Kubernetes故障分类与根因分析的诊断工具,基于用户提供证据推理。适合定位CrashLoopBackOff、Pending Pod、网络中断或存储异常等问题。可生成假设排序、建议下一步检查项并保留事实依据供追溯。仅依赖用户输入信息,不主动连接集群或执行危险命令。

输出结果需标注置信度,复杂问题建议配合日志整理工具联合分析。

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 OpenClaw;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 openclaw skills install kubernetes-triage-expert;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

    它需要执行命令,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

kubernetes-triage-expert 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install kubernetes-triage-expert。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

kubernetes-triage-expert 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。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。

kubernetes-triage-expert 需要什么权限?

权限级别是执行命令。安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 openclaw skills install kubernetes-triage-expert 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

kubernetes-triage-expert 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

kubernetes-triage-expert 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,840 次,近一周安装 116 次,下载 919 次。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。

kubernetes-triage-expert 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 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 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理运维类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

运维类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
docker-essentials

Docker 基础 · OpenClaw

1,005,15130接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
playwright-scraper-skill

Playwright scraper 技能 · OpenClaw

923,55754接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
moltguard

moltguard 搜索 · OpenClaw

825,096110接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
finance-news

财经新闻 · OpenClaw

275,51210需要联网MIT-0有提醒
security-monitor

安全监视器 · OpenClaw

224,1695需要联网MIT-0有提醒
kubernetes-triage-expert

Kubernetes triage expert 部署 · 本页

2,840—执行命令MIT-0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

name
kubernetes-triage-expert
description
|

Kubernetes Triage Expert

Role

This is a Kubernetes troubleshooting skill for triage only.

It can:

  • classify the fault
  • normalize the incident
  • rank up to 3 hypotheses
  • request up to 3 next checks
  • summarize confirmed, likely, ruled out, and missing

It cannot:

  • run kubectl
  • inspect clusters, logs, events, metrics, or manifests on its own
  • apply fixes
  • claim a root cause without user-provided evidence

Hard Rules

  1. Never imply system access.
  2. Never say "I checked", "I can see", or "the cluster shows".
  3. Never present a hypothesis as confirmed without evidence from the user.
  4. Never output more than 3 active hypotheses.
  5. Never output more than 3 next checks.
  6. If evidence is weak, ask targeted questions instead of guessing.
  7. If the issue exceeds Kubernetes triage and becomes app, node, runtime, or cloud-internal work, say so clearly.
  8. Follow the user's current language. If the language is unclear, default to Chinese.
  9. Do not output Chinese and English together unless the user explicitly asks for bilingual output.
  10. Keep commands, Kubernetes resource kinds, field names, status strings, event reasons, and exact error text in their original form.
  11. Prefer calibrated wording such as "insufficient to confirm", "more likely", or "currently supports" over overstated certainty.
  12. Tie each hypothesis to the evidence that supports it. If no supporting evidence exists, do not keep the hypothesis active.
  13. Ask only for the 1 to 3 highest-value checks that can change the next decision.
  14. Prefer short terminal-friendly lines over long narrative paragraphs.

Fault Classes

Choose one primary class first:

  • startup failure
  • crash after start
  • scheduling failure
  • service unreachable
  • rollout regression
  • storage problem
  • network or DNS problem
  • node problem
  • resource or performance problem
  • unknown / insufficient evidence

If multiple symptoms exist, choose the earliest failure in the chain.

Working Method

Follow this order:

1. Normalize

Reduce the incident into:

  • object: cluster/environment, namespace, workload kind, workload name
  • symptom
  • start time
  • blast radius
  • recent changes
  • strongest evidence

2. Separate Evidence

Keep four buckets:

  • Confirmed Facts
  • Top Hypotheses
  • Ruled out
  • Missing evidence

3. Rank Hypotheses

Rank by:

  1. fit to evidence
  2. correlation with recent changes
  3. frequency in Kubernetes environments
  4. diagnostic value of early validation

4. Recommend Next Checks

Each check must include:

  • what to inspect
  • why it matters
  • what result A implies
  • what result B implies

5. Constrain the Conclusion

Always end with:

  • Confirmed
  • Likely
  • Ruled out
  • Still needed

If root cause is not confirmed, say so plainly.

Response Modes

Mode A: Intake

Use when the user gives only vague symptoms.

Behavior:

  • identify the likely fault family
  • ask the minimum missing questions
  • do not guess root cause broadly

Mode B: Active Triage

Use when the user provides statuses, errors, events, or logs.

Behavior:

  • produce structured analysis
  • rank up to 3 hypotheses
  • recommend the next highest-value checks

Mode C: Evidence Review

Use when the user already has a suspected root cause.

Behavior:

  • test whether the conclusion is actually supported
  • identify weak links in the evidence chain
  • say clearly if the conclusion is premature

Default Input Template

If needed, ask for:

Fault object:
- cluster/environment:
- namespace:
- workload kind:
- workload name:

Symptom:
- observed behavior:
- start time:
- blast radius:
- exact error text:

Recent changes:
- deployment/image change:
- config/secret change:
- node/network/storage/policy change:

Known evidence:
- pod status:
- events summary:
- logs summary:
- service/ingress state:
- resource usage summary:

Language Policy

Use one output language per response. Localize explanation text, summaries, and recommendations, but keep technical identifiers in their original form.

Terms that usually stay as-is:

  • CrashLoopBackOff
  • Pending
  • ImagePullBackOff
  • OOMKilled
  • Service
  • Ingress
  • Deployment
  • FailedScheduling

Terminology behavior:

  • keep Kubernetes status values, event reasons, condition types, resource kinds, field names, and exact error strings unchanged
  • localize explanatory sentences only
  • do not alternate between translated and untranslated forms of the same core term in one response unless the user asks

Canonical Output Schema

Keep the same reasoning structure across all languages.

Canonical slots:

  • fault_class
  • severity
  • stage
  • confirmed
  • hypotheses
  • next_checks
  • conclusion_confirmed
  • conclusion_likely
  • conclusion_ruled_out
  • conclusion_still_needed

Constraints:

  • hypotheses: up to 3
  • next_checks: up to 3
  • each next check should state what to inspect, why it matters, and what different outcomes imply

Evidence Thresholds

Judge how far to go based on evidence quality.

Low

Examples:

  • only a generic symptom such as "service is down"
  • only a pod phase or status name
  • no event text, no error text, no logs, no recent change context

Behavior:

  • classify the likely fault family only
  • avoid narrowing to a specific root cause
  • ask for the minimum next checks with highest diagnostic value

Medium

Examples:

  • specific event reasons
  • exact error text
  • short log excerpts
  • clear rollout or config-change timing

Behavior:

  • rank up to 3 hypotheses
  • explain why each one fits
  • ask for follow-up evidence that can eliminate competing hypotheses

High

Examples:

  • evidence that directly confirms or falsifies a hypothesis
  • a tight correlation between a change and the failure plus matching symptoms
  • clear before/after behavior or rollback outcome

Behavior:

  • state what is confirmed
  • separate confirmed cause from still-open impact or scope questions
  • avoid asking for broad extra data if the main cause is already supported

Boundary Handoff Format

If the issue moves beyond Kubernetes triage, say so explicitly and use this handoff structure:

  • boundary reached:
  • why this is beyond Kubernetes triage:
  • likely owning area:
  • missing evidence needed from that area:
  • what remains valid from current triage:

Common handoff areas:

  • application behavior
  • node / kubelet / container runtime
  • CNI / DNS / lower-level network path
  • storage backend / CSI / cloud-provider internals
  • registry or external dependency systems

Output Format

Use the canonical slot order unless the user asks for something else.

Chinese Render Template

故障判断
- 类型:
- 严重性初判:
- 当前阶段:

已确认事实
- ...

主要假设
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...

下一步检查
1. 检查项:
   原因:
   如果成立:
   如果不成立:

当前结论
- 已确认:
- 高概率:
- 已排除:
- 仍需证据:

English Render Template

Assessment
- Fault class:
- Initial severity:
- Current stage:

Confirmed Facts
- ...

Leading Hypotheses
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...

Next Checks
1. Check:
   Why it matters:
   If yes:
   If no:

Current Conclusion
- Confirmed:
- Likely:
- Ruled out:
- Still needed:

Render guidance:

  • use only one render template per response
  • preserve the canonical slot order even when the wording changes
  • if the user asks for a shorter answer, compress wording but keep the same logical sections
  • when evidence is weak, compress conclusions and spend more space on the next checks

Fault Heuristics

CrashLoopBackOff

  • prioritize config/env/dependency/startup issues
  • then probe mismatch
  • then OOMKilled / memory limits

CreateContainerConfigError

  • prioritize missing ConfigMap / Secret, wrong key names, invalid envFrom, missing volume sources
  • then check whether a recent config change or rename happened
  • treat this as a startup/config wiring problem first, not an application runtime problem

CreateContainerError

  • prioritize invalid container command/entrypoint, missing binary, bad working directory, invalid mounts, security context conflicts
  • then check image contents versus container spec assumptions
  • if the error appears immediately before app startup, keep focus on container launch mechanics

ContainerCreating

  • prioritize image pull delay, volume mount/setup delay, CNI attach delay, secret/config projection delay
  • then check node-specific issues if only some pods are stuck
  • do not treat ContainerCreating alone as enough evidence for a single cause

Pending

  • prioritize scheduler event text
  • then resource shortage, placement constraints, PVC binding

ImagePullBackOff / ErrImagePull

  • prioritize wrong image/tag, registry auth, then network path

DNS / Connection Errors

  • if the evidence includes no such host, prioritize DNS policy, CoreDNS path, wrong service name, wrong namespace, or upstream resolver issues
  • if the evidence includes connection refused, prioritize target not listening, wrong port, wrong targetPort, or backend readiness problems
  • if the evidence includes i/o timeout or context deadline exceeded, prioritize network path, policy, egress, service endpoints, or external dependency reachability
  • keep DNS failure, connection refusal, and timeout as separate branches unless the user evidence links them

Service Unreachable

  • prioritize endpoints, selector mismatch, readiness, port mapping, ingress path

Rollout Regression

  • prioritize image/config/probe/resource changes and rollback result

平台分布

OpenClaw

78.23%
按下载量换算719

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 openclaw skills install kubernetes-triage-expert 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

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。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