返回技能列表

pre-mortem

avelikiy
更新于 2 days ago
3 次查看
30
6
30
在 GitHub 上查看
aidesign

关于

The pre-mortem skill helps developers identify concrete risks before implementation by imagining a project has already failed catastrophically and working backwards to find likely causes. It's used at planning stages—like architecture review or threat modeling—for irreversible or high-impact features. This method forces specific risk identification beyond generic lists, using a structured 5-step process.

快速安装

Claude Code

推荐
主要方式
npx skills add avelikiy/great_cto -a claude-code
插件命令备选方式
/plugin add https://github.com/avelikiy/great_cto
Git 克隆备选方式
git clone https://github.com/avelikiy/great_cto.git ~/.claude/skills/pre-mortem

在 Claude Code 中复制并粘贴此命令以安装该技能

技能文档

Pre-mortem — fail-it-before-you-build-it

A retrospective for a project that hasn't happened yet. Surfaces real risks that "list every risk" prompts miss.

Originated in Gary Klein's research at MIT Sloan, now standard at AWS and other ops-mature orgs.

The 5-step pre-mortem

Step 1. Imagine you're 6 months in the future

The project shipped. It is a clear, public failure. There's a Reddit thread about it. The CEO is asking what went wrong.

Step 2. Write the post-mortem newspaper headline

One sentence. Concrete. Specific. Examples:

  • ❌ Bad: "We had some quality issues."
  • ✅ Good: "On 2026-09-12, the Stripe webhook handler deduplicated by raw body hash, so 30K customers were double-charged after Stripe retried delivery during a network blip."

The headline forces you to name the failure mode SPECIFICALLY.

Step 3. List every individual reason this exact failure happened

Brainstorm 10-15 reasons. Be specific. Each item should reference:

  • A real component / file
  • A real failure mode (race condition, schema mismatch, expired credential)
  • A real human factor (oncall didn't see alert, runbook was outdated)

Reject hand-waves like "testing was insufficient." Replace with "we didn't write a property-based test for the dedup-key collision case."

Step 4. Rank by likelihood × severity

For each cause, score:

  • Likelihood: 1-5 (1=once-in-a-decade, 5=monthly)
  • Severity: 1-5 (1=cosmetic, 5=data loss / regulatory breach)
  • Risk score: likelihood × severity

Top 3 by risk score → these are your highest-priority mitigations.

Step 5. For each top-3 cause, write a guardrail in the plan

Each guardrail is a concrete change to the plan:

  • A test that would have caught it
  • A circuit breaker / feature flag
  • A runbook entry
  • A monitoring alert with specific SLO

If a top-3 cause CANNOT be mitigated within the time/budget, escalate to the user: "This plan accepts the risk of X with no mitigation."

Template — add to PLAN-*.md

## Pre-mortem

Six months from now, this project failed. Headline:

> <one-sentence failure headline>

### Top reasons (likelihood × severity)

| Cause | L | S | Risk | Mitigation in plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <specific cause> | 4 | 5 | 20 | <Task #N: write idempotency test> |
| ... | | | | |

### Accepted risks (no mitigation)

- <risk> — accepted because <budget/scope reason>. Owner: <name>.

Common failure modes by archetype

Quick start — most-common pre-mortem causes per archetype:

ArchetypeCommon failure
fintech / commerceIdempotency-key collision; double-charge during retry storm
healthcarePHI leak via debug log; BAA not signed with vendor
web3Oracle staleness; flash-loan exploit on bonding curve
mlopsTraining/serving skew; model drift undetected
iot-embeddedOTA bricks devices in a region with no recovery path
data-platformLate-arriving data overwrites correct values
ai-system / agent-productPrompt injection exfiltrates other users' data
enterprise-saasCross-tenant data leak via RLS gap
cli-toolDestructive flag with no confirmation (rm -rf equivalent)
libraryBreaking change in minor version bump

Anti-patterns in pre-mortems

Vague risks. "Performance might be a problem." Be specific: which operation, at what load, what's the SLO.

Cosmic risks. "AWS could go down." Yes, but that's not actionable. Focus on what you can mitigate.

Defensive list. Listing risks you've already mitigated to look thorough. Only list risks the current plan does NOT yet address.

Skip the headline. Without the headline, the team won't believe the failure scenario is real.

When to skip

  • nano project_size — pre-mortem is overhead.
  • Pure refactor with full test coverage — guardrails already exist.
  • Bug-fix with one-line repro — risk is well-bounded.

GitHub 仓库

avelikiy/great_cto
路径: skills/pre-mortem
0
agentic-codingclaude-code-pluginclaude-code-skillsclaude-code-subagentscode-reviewcto

相关推荐技能

content-collections

Content Collections 是一个 TypeScript 优先的构建工具,可将本地 Markdown/MDX 文件转换为类型安全的数据集合。它专为构建博客、文档站和内容密集型 Vite+React 应用而设计,提供基于 Zod 的自动模式验证。该工具涵盖从 Vite 插件配置、MDX 编译到生产环境部署的完整工作流。

查看技能

polymarket

这个Claude Skill为开发者提供完整的Polymarket预测市场开发支持,涵盖API调用、交易执行和市场数据分析。关键特性包括实时WebSocket数据流,可监控实时交易、订单和市场动态。开发者可用它构建预测市场应用、实施交易策略并集成实时市场预测功能。

查看技能

creating-opencode-plugins

该Skill帮助开发者创建OpenCode插件,用于接入命令、文件、LSP等25+种事件。它提供了插件结构、事件API规范和JavaScript/TypeScript实现模式,适合需要拦截操作、扩展功能或自定义事件处理的场景。开发者可通过它快速构建响应式模块来增强OpenCode AI助手的能力。

查看技能

sglang

SGLang是一个专为LLM设计的高性能推理框架,特别适用于需要结构化输出的场景。它通过RadixAttention前缀缓存技术,在处理JSON、正则表达式、工具调用等具有重复前缀的复杂工作流时,能实现极速生成。如果你正在构建智能体或多轮对话系统,并追求远超vLLM的推理性能,SGLang是理想选择。

查看技能