| name | omh-reliability-review |
| description | [omh] Hermes Reliability Review workflow: postmortems, SLOs, error budgets, incident follow-ups, and service reliability evidence. Use when the user says: reliability-review, reliability review, incident review, incident postmortem, postmortem, post-mortem, slo review, slo. |
Reliability Review
This is a Hermes-native reliability-review workflow skill.
Why This Exists
reliability-review exists to make SRE-style review strict: service reliability claims must point to metrics or references, and remediation remains separate from the review narrative.
Do Not Use When
- The user only needs a generic status report or leadership deck.
- No service, incident, SLO, metric, or reliability source boundary is available.
- The request is implementation of remediation rather than review of reliability evidence.
Examples
Good example:
- Prompt: reliability-review 장애 포스트모템과 SLO 에러버짓 상태를 검토해줘.
- Expected behavior: Prepare a reliability artifact that separates metrics/references, assumptions, missing evidence, and remediation follow-ups.
- Why: The request is reliability evidence review with closure-sensitive claims.
Bad example:
- Prompt: reliability-review make a monthly PPT report for leadership.
- Expected behavior: Use
report-package unless the report specifically asks for reliability evidence review.
- Why: Report packaging and reliability validation are independent operations surfaces.
Completion Checklist
- Confirm the workflow target, evidence boundary, and stop condition are named.
- Report which outputs are prepared, observed, blocked, or missing.
- Name the smallest next verification or handoff instead of claiming completion from narration.
Recovery Notes
- If required context is missing, ask one blocking question or route back to the narrower workflow.
- If runtime or wrapper evidence is unavailable, keep the status as not_observed and expose the next observable action.
Workflow Lane
- Current lane: Research and company ops (
source-finder, research, best-practice-research, autoresearch-goal, research-brief, strategy-brief, feedback-triage, research-department, +13 more) - research, signals, ops, and briefings.
- If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to
oh-my-hermes or name the adjacent workflow.
- Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules:
omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md.
Use When
Use when Hermes should review incident notes, SLOs, error budgets, or service reliability evidence while keeping remediation and closure claims observed.
Strong routing signals: `reliability-review`, `reliability review`, `incident review`, `incident postmortem`, `postmortem`, `post-mortem`, `slo review`, `slo`, `sla`, `error budget`, `service reliability`, `reliability followup`, `remediation tracking`, `sre review`, `장애 리뷰`, `장애 회고`, `포스트모템`, `사후 분석`, `에러버짓`, `에러 버짓`, `서비스 신뢰성`, `신뢰성 검증`, `재발 방지`
Catalog Metadata
Category: reliability
Phase: incident-and-slo-review
Hermes role: operator
Quality tier: reliability-gated
Reasoning demand: standard
Quality bar:
- Name service, incident/time window, SLO/error-budget target, source references, and missing observations.
- Separate supplied metrics, incident notes, assumptions, and remediation follow-ups.
- Keep closure and remediation status unobserved until evidence is supplied.
Handoff policy:
Keep incident/SLO/error-budget review in Hermes; prepare remediation handoffs only after an accepted fix direction exists and record closure only from observed evidence.
Required inputs:
- service or incident scope
- time window
- metric/source references
- known remediation items or gaps
Expected outputs:
- reliability review
- evidence and missing-evidence list
- remediation follow-up boundary
Artifact expectations:
- operation_artifact/v1 reliability-review artifact when a wrapper or CLI records it
Safety rules:
- Do not claim SLO pass, healthy error budget, incident closure, or remediation completion without source, metric, or reference evidence.
- Do not treat a reliability narrative as verification, review, CI, merge, or deploy evidence.
- Route code remediation through a separate accepted plan or executor handoff.
Runtime Evidence
Preferred harness for this skill: reliability-review.
omh runtime record --skill reliability-review --harness reliability-review --status started
Record observed delegation results; otherwise return not_available or not_observed.
Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.
- Treat wrapper memory/context summaries as advisory local context, not proof of opaque Hermes memory reads or changes.
Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.
Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.
Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.
