Blameless post-mortem structure, incident timeline reconstruction, response evaluation, and organizational learning
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-post-mortem-framework --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Nw Post Mortem Framework?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/nwave-ai-nw-post-mortem-framework-nwave)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: nw-post-mortem-framework
description: Blameless post-mortem structure, incident timeline reconstruction, response evaluation, and organizational learning
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: true
---
# Post-Mortem Framework
## Principles
- **Blameless**: focus on systems/processes, not individuals. People make reasonable decisions given available info.
- **Evidence-based**: every finding backed by logs, metrics, or documented actions
- **Action-oriented**: every finding produces concrete, assigned action item
- **Learning-focused**: capture what worked alongside what failed
## Post-Mortem Document Structure
```markdown
# Post-Mortem: [Incident Title]
**Date**: [incident date]
**Duration**: [start to resolution]
**Severity**: [P0-P3]
**Author**: [analyst]
## Summary
[2-3 sentence overview: what happened, impact, resolution]
## Timeline
| Time | Event | Source |
|------|-------|--------|
| HH:MM | [event] | [log/metric/report] |
## Impact
- Users affected: [number/percentage]
- Duration of impact: [time]
- Business impact: [quantified if possible]
- Systems affected: [list]
## Root Cause Analysis
[5 Whys analysis with evidence at each level]
## Detection and Response
- Time to detect: [duration] -- [how detected]
- Time to respond: [duration] -- [first action]
- Time to mitigate: [duration] -- [mitigation applied]
- Time to resolve: [duration] -- [permanent fix]
## What Went Well
- [positive observations about detection, response, recovery]
## What Could Be Improved
- [areas where detection, response, recovery fell short]
## Action Items
| ID | Action | Owner | Priority | Due Date |
|----|--------|-------|----------|----------|
| 1 | [specific action] | [team/person] | [P0-P3] | [date] |
## Lessons Learned
- [key takeaways for the organization]
```
## Incident Timeline Reconstruction
### Sources
1. Monitoring alerts/dashboards (timestamps) | 2. Deployment logs/CI-CD records
3. Communication channels (Slack, email, incident) | 4. VCS (commits, merges, deploys) | 5. User reports/support tickets
### Quality Checks
Events chronological with verified timestamps | gaps >5 min noted/explained | decision points identified with available info | causal relationships noted
## Response Effectiveness Evaluation
### Detection
Detected by monitoring or users? | Duration onset-to-detection? | Existing alerts relevant? Missing?
### Escalation
Right team at right time? | Procedures followed? | Communication clear to stakeholders?
### Resolution
Mitigation effective? | Rollback considered/viable? | Duration mitigation-to-permanent-fix?
## Organizational Learning
### Knowledge Capture
Document root causes as reusable patterns | update runbooks | share in retrospectives
### Process Improvements
Update monitoring/alerting per detection gaps | revise deployment per rollback effectiveness | strengthen testing for failure scenario
### Action Item Tracking
Every item has owner + due date | track in standups/sprint reviews | verify effectiveness post-deployment
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!