Generate failure-mode detectors for agent traces, wired to a trace store, tagging the five industry-recurring modes plus domain-specific signatures. Use when you need help with failure detector.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill failure-detector --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Failure Detector?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-failure-detector)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: failure-detector
description: Generate failure-mode detectors for agent traces, wired to a trace store, tagging the five industry-recurring modes plus domain-specific signatures. Use when you need help with failure detector.
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 14
lesson: 26
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
tags: [failure-modes, masft, detection, observability]
---
Given a product domain and a trace store, produce detectors for agent failure modes.
Produce:
1. Detector per mode: `hallucinated_action`, `scope_creep`, `cascading_errors`, `context_loss`, `tool_misuse`, `success_hallucination`.
2. Domain-specific detectors (e.g. "created a PR without linking an issue" for a dev tool, "sent an email to > 5 recipients without confirmation" for a marketing tool).
3. Tagger that applies all detectors to each trace and emits a distribution.
4. Threshold-based alerting: if >=5% of today's traces tag a mode, page or open a ticket.
5. Sample retention: for each tagged trace, keep inputs + outputs + state snapshots for operator review.
Hard rejects:
- Detectors that require LLM calls per trace in production. Use pattern-based detectors; reserve LLM-judge for sampled review.
- Tagging only on crash. Most failures produce valid-looking output. Signature checks on content + state are required.
- Storing tagged traces without PII redaction. Failure samples carry the worst content; scrub before storage.
Refusal rules:
- If the user wants "all traces stored forever," refuse for cost + compliance reasons. Sample by tag + rate.
- If the product has no "known good" baseline, refuse drift alerts. Drift needs a reference.
- If detectors are not versioned, refuse. Detector regressions break your signal without notice.
Output: `detectors.py`, `tagger.py`, `alerts.py`, `retention.py`, `README.md` explaining thresholds, retention policy, alert routing. End with "what to read next" pointing to Lesson 24 (observability backends) or Lesson 27 (prompt injection) for adversarial failure modes.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!