Use when performing hotfix emergency review — expedited review process template for production hotfixes covering incident correlation, minimal change verification, rollback readiness, regression risk assessment, and post-incident follow-up tracking. Provides a streamlined but thorough review framework for emergency fixes that balances speed with safety.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add cloudthinker-ai/CloudSkills --skill hotfix-emergency-review --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Hotfix Emergency Review?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/cloudthinker-ai-hotfix-emergency-review)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: hotfix-emergency-review
enabled: true
description: |
Use when performing hotfix emergency review — expedited review process
template for production hotfixes covering incident correlation, minimal change
verification, rollback readiness, regression risk assessment, and
post-incident follow-up tracking. Provides a streamlined but thorough review
framework for emergency fixes that balances speed with safety.
required_connections:
- prefix: github
label: "GitHub"
config_fields:
- key: repository
label: "Repository"
required: true
placeholder: "e.g., org/production-service"
- key: pr_number
label: "PR Number"
required: true
placeholder: "e.g., 1234"
- key: incident_id
label: "Incident ID"
required: true
placeholder: "e.g., INC-5678"
features:
- CODE_REVIEW
---
# Hotfix Emergency Review Skill
Emergency review of PR **#{{ pr_number }}** in **{{ repository }}** for incident **{{ incident_id }}**.
## Workflow
### Phase 1 — Incident Correlation
```
INCIDENT VERIFICATION
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Incident details:
- Incident ID: {{ incident_id }}
- Severity: SEV1 / SEV2 / SEV3
- Impact: ___
- Root cause identified: YES / NO
- Root cause: ___
[ ] Fix correlation:
[ ] Changes directly address the root cause
[ ] No unrelated changes included
[ ] Fix matches incident investigation findings
[ ] Current status:
- Incident start time: ___
- Current mitigation: ___
- Users affected: ___
```
### Phase 2 — Minimal Change Verification
```
CHANGE SCOPE CHECK
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Minimal fix:
[ ] Only changes necessary for the fix are included
[ ] No refactoring or cleanup bundled in
[ ] No feature work included
[ ] Change is the smallest safe fix possible
[ ] Change assessment:
- Files changed: ___
- Lines added: ___
- Lines removed: ___
[ ] Change size appropriate for hotfix: YES / NO
[ ] Alternative approaches considered: ___
```
### Phase 3 — Safety Checks
```
SAFETY VERIFICATION
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Regression risk:
[ ] Fix does not break existing functionality
[ ] Critical path tested manually
[ ] Automated tests pass (or known failures documented)
[ ] Fix does not introduce new security vulnerabilities
[ ] Rollback readiness:
[ ] Rollback procedure documented
[ ] Rollback can be done quickly (< 5 minutes)
[ ] Feature flags available for instant rollback
[ ] Database changes are rollback-safe
[ ] Deployment safety:
[ ] Canary deployment possible: YES / NO
[ ] Health checks will catch regressions: YES / NO
[ ] Monitoring dashboards identified for post-deploy
[ ] Alerting covers the fixed scenario
```
### Phase 4 — Post-Incident Tracking
```
FOLLOW-UP ITEMS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Technical debt:
[ ] TODO: Proper fix ticket created: ___
[ ] TODO: Tests to add: ___
[ ] TODO: Monitoring to improve: ___
[ ] TODO: Documentation to update: ___
[ ] Process improvements:
[ ] Post-incident review scheduled: YES / NO
[ ] Runbook update needed: YES / NO
[ ] Alert tuning needed: YES / NO
[ ] Hotfix to be cherry-picked to: ___
```
## Counter-Rationalizations
| Shortcut | Counter | Why |
|----------|---------|-----|
| "We can skip some steps for this case" | Adapt the workflow steps, don't skip them | Skipped steps are where incidents and oversights originate |
| "The user seems to already know what to do" | Complete all workflow phases with the user | The workflow catches blind spots that experience alone misses |
| "This is a minor case, full process is overkill" | Scale the process down, don't turn it off | Minor cases become major when unstructured; the process scales, not disappears |
| "I'll fill in the details later" | Complete each section before moving on | Deferred details are forgotten; real-time capture is more accurate |
| "The template output isn't necessary" | Always produce the structured output format | Structured output enables comparison, audit trails, and handoff to other teams |
## Output Format
Produce an emergency review report with:
1. **Incident correlation** (confirmed fix addresses root cause)
2. **Change scope** (minimal / acceptable / too broad)
3. **Safety assessment** (safe to deploy / deploy with caution / needs rework)
4. **Rollback readiness** (ready / partially ready / not ready)
5. **Follow-up items** tracked for post-incident
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!