
Skill
production-incident-responder
guide production incident response for Spring services
Description
Guide production incident response for Kotlin plus Spring services from first alert through mitigation, diagnosis, and follow-up. Use when error rates spike, latency degrades, capacity saturates, a bad deploy or config change is suspected, or the team needs reversible mitigation first and deeper root-cause work second.
SKILL.md
Production Incident Responder
Source mapping: Tier 2 high-value skill derived from Kotlin_Spring_Developer_Pipeline.md (SK-24).
Mission
Restore service safely before chasing perfect explanations. Keep mitigation, diagnosis, communication, and evidence preservation disciplined and explicit.
First Principles
- Mitigate first.
- Prefer reversible actions over heroic code changes.
- Preserve evidence while the system is still exhibiting the problem.
- Separate confirmed facts from working hypotheses.
Inputs To Gather
- Current alert state, user impact, and blast radius.
- Recent deploys, config changes, feature-flag changes, and dependency incidents.
- Key dashboards: latency, error rate, saturation, dependency health, queue depth, pool usage.
- Correlated traces and logs for the failing path.
- Known runbooks, rollback mechanisms, and feature flags.
Response Sequence
- State impact and likely severity.
- Stop unsafe changes and identify the fastest reversible mitigation:
- rollback
- disable feature
- reduce concurrency
- shed load
- rate-limit callers
- isolate or degrade a dependency
- Preserve high-signal evidence while the symptom still exists.
- Compare timeline of incident onset with recent changes.
- Localize the failing layer: application, database, downstream dependency, queue, infrastructure, or configuration.
- Propose long-term corrective actions only after the service is stable.
Advanced Incident Heuristics
- Restarting everything can destroy the best evidence and amplify a connection storm. Use restarts deliberately, not reflexively.
- Scaling the app tier does not help when the database or a downstream service is the bottleneck.
- Rate-limiting or queue pausing may protect core flows better than full rollback when only one feature path is toxic.
- A config-only incident can look like a code regression; compare effective runtime values before patching application code.
- A healthy dependency at low volume can still fail under retry storms from your own fleet.
- If the system uses caches, verify whether bad cache fill, stampede, or stale data amplified the incident.
- If the incident is intermittent, preserve timing and hypothesis logs. Races and saturation patterns are easy to lose after mitigation.
- Post-incident work must include detection and prevention, not only the code fix.
Incident Command Nuances
- One person should own technical command during a serious incident. Parallel debugging without a decision owner often slows mitigation.
- Communication cadence matters. Operators and stakeholders need regular updates even when the technical picture is incomplete.
- Rollback is not always safe if data shape or side effects have already changed. Assess rollback safety before pressing the button.
- Canary comparison, feature-flag cohort analysis, and effective-config diffing often localize incidents faster than code inspection.
- Preserve version, commit, config, and infrastructure fingerprints in the incident notes while they are still recoverable.
Expert Heuristics
- Choose the first mitigation that reduces blast radius and buys time, not the one that feels most technically satisfying.
- Prefer mitigations that also test a hypothesis when that can be done safely.
- If the incident spans several layers, identify the current bottlenecked layer first. Solving secondary symptoms wastes the window of action.
- A good postmortem action item changes detection, defaults, rollout strategy, or operational safety nets, not just one line of code.
Output Contract
Return these sections:
Impact: who or what is affected and how badly.Immediate mitigation: the safest reversible action to reduce pain now.Evidence: the strongest signals collected so far.Working hypothesis: the leading explanation plus uncertainty.Next diagnostic step: the most informative next action once stable.Follow-up: long-term fix, monitoring change, and postmortem actions.
Guardrails
- Do not recommend code changes as the very first incident action when a reversible mitigation exists.
- Do not claim root cause certainty without evidence.
- Do not optimize for elegance over containment during an outage.
- Do not forget operator communication and blast-radius tracking while debugging.
Quality Bar
A good run of this skill reduces user pain quickly and leaves the team with a cleaner path to root cause. A bad run jumps to speculative code fixes while the service remains unstable and evidence disappears.
More skills from the skills repository
View all 128 skillsalgorithmic-art
create generative art with p5.js
Jul 13CreativeGenerative ArtGraphicsJavaScriptantfu
configure JavaScript projects with Anthony Fu's tools
Jul 13Best PracticesEngineeringJavaScriptTypeScriptbrand-guidelines
apply Anthropic brand guidelines
Jul 13BrandingDesignTypographycanvas-design
create visual art and design assets
Jul 13CreativeDesignImagesPDFci-cd-containerization-advisor
design CI/CD pipelines for Kotlin applications
Jul 13CI/CDContainersDeploymentEngineering +2cloudflare-deploy
deploy applications to Cloudflare
Jul 17CloudflareCloudflare PagesCloudflare WorkersDeployment
More from JetBrains
View publishermps-aspect-accessories
configure JetBrains MPS module dependencies
MPS
Jul 17ArchitectureConfigurationEngineeringmps-aspect-actions
define and edit MPS node factories
MPS
Jul 17ArchitectureEngineeringmps-aspect-behavior
define and edit MPS concept behavior
MPS
Jul 13ArchitectureEngineeringmps-aspect-constraints
define JetBrains MPS language constraints
MPS
Jul 17ArchitectureCode Analysismps-aspect-dataflow
define and debug MPS dataflow builders
MPS
Jul 13Data Analysismps-aspect-editor
define MPS editor layouts
MPS
Jul 13DesignUI Components