Incident response pipeline for GitLab repositories using Copilot CLI, Jira, and troubleshooter. Takes a Jira incident, investigates root cause, optionally fixes via TDD, and reviews the merge request. User decides whether to fix or just document findings on the Jira ticket. Triggers on: gitlab incident, incident pipeline, troubleshoot gitlab.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add igorilic/agentic-orchestration --skill pipeline-gitlab-incident --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Pipeline Gitlab Incident?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/igorilic-pipeline-gitlab-incident)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: pipeline-gitlab-incident
description: >
Incident response pipeline for GitLab repositories using Copilot CLI,
Jira, and troubleshooter. Takes a Jira incident, investigates root cause,
optionally fixes via TDD, and reviews the merge request. User decides
whether to fix or just document findings on the Jira ticket.
Triggers on: gitlab incident, incident pipeline, troubleshoot gitlab.
disable-model-invocation: true
---
## Pipeline: GitLab Incident Response (Copilot CLI + Jira + Troubleshooter)
```
Jira Incident Ticket
│
├─ 1. troubleshooter (Opus-tier)
│ Fetch Jira ticket → gather evidence
│ → ArgoCD status, kubectl logs, App Insights
│ → Correlate timestamps → root cause diagnosis
│ → Key findings + next action
│
├─ 2. USER DECISION POINT
│ ├─ Option A: Document only
│ │ → Add key findings + next action to Jira ticket
│ │ → Pipeline ends
│ │
│ └─ Option B: Fix the issue
│ ↓
│
├─ 3. tdd-developer (Sonnet-tier) — per step
│ Step 1: write test that REPRODUCES the bug (RED)
│ Step 2+: implement fix (GREEN → REFACTOR)
│
├─ 4. qa (Opus-tier)
│ Run affected tests → verify fix
│ Ensure no regressions
│
├─ 5. reviewer (Sonnet-tier) — MR review
│ Review fix against diagnosis
│ Verify bug reproduction test exists
│ 🔴 MUST FIX / 🟡 SHOULD FIX / 🟢 SUGGESTION
│ → User triages
│
└─ 6. Create MR + Update Jira
Push branch → create MR → link to incident ticket
Transition Jira ticket status
```
### Prerequisites
- GitLab repository with `glab` CLI configured
- Jira MCP server or `jira` CLI configured
- GitHub Copilot CLI installed
- Azure CLI (`az`) for App Insights queries
- `kubectl` contexts configured for EMEA/APAC/NAM clusters
### Usage
#### Step 1: Investigate the incident
```bash
copilot --agent=troubleshooter --prompt "Investigate Jira incident PROJ-456"
```
Troubleshooter produces:
- `docs/context/specs/PROJ-456-bugfix.md` — diagnosis with key findings
- `docs/context/specs/PROJ-456-todo.md` — fix steps (if applicable)
#### Step 2: Decide next action
**Option A — Document only (no code fix needed):**
Add the diagnosis to the Jira ticket as a comment:
```bash
jira issue comment add PROJ-456 --body "## Root Cause Analysis
$(cat docs/context/specs/PROJ-456-bugfix.md)"
```
Pipeline ends here. The key findings and recommended next action are
now on the Jira ticket for the team to review.
**Option B — Fix the issue:**
Continue to Step 3.
#### Step 3: Implement the fix
```bash
copilot --agent=tdd-developer --prompt "Step 1 of PROJ-456-todo.md"
```
Step 1 always reproduces the bug as a failing test.
#### Step 4: Run tests
```bash
copilot --agent=qa --prompt "Run tests for PROJ-456 fix"
```
#### Step 5: Review the fix
```bash
copilot --agent=reviewer --prompt "Review PROJ-456 bugfix MR"
```
#### Step 6: Create MR and update Jira
```bash
glab mr create --title "fix(scope): description" --description "Fixes PROJ-456"
jira issue transition PROJ-456 "In Review"
```
### Troubleshooter Output Format
The troubleshooter produces a structured diagnosis:
```markdown
## Diagnosis: PROJ-456
### Key Findings
1. <finding with evidence>
2. <finding with evidence>
### Scope
<Regional or global? Which clusters affected?>
### Root Cause
<Identified root cause with evidence chain>
### Timeline
<deployment → first error → ticket report>
### Next Action
- [ ] <recommended action — fix, rollback, config change, etc.>
### Evidence
| Source | Region | Finding |
|--------|--------|---------|
| App Insights | EMEA | ... |
| kubectl logs | EMEA | ... |
```
### Notes
- The user decision point is critical — not every incident needs a code fix
- Rollbacks, config changes, or infrastructure fixes may be the right action
- If troubleshooter recommends rollback, do that FIRST before any code fix
- Key findings are always documented regardless of the chosen path
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!