incident-postmortem-generator

name	incident-postmortem-generator
description	Generate a blameless incident postmortem from the current or recent SRE Agent investigation. Use after an incident is resolved, when asked for a postmortem, RCA report, incident review, or lessons learned document.
tools	["execute_kusto_query","RunAzCliReadCommands"]

Incident Postmortem Generator

Purpose

Automatically generate a structured, blameless postmortem document from the context of a resolved incident investigation. Leverages the timeline, root cause analysis, and mitigations already gathered by the SRE Agent.

When to use this skill

• User asks for a postmortem after an incident is resolved
• User asks for an RCA report, incident review, or lessons learned
• Automated trigger after incident resolution (via agent hook)
• User asks "write up what just happened"

Postmortem principles

• Blameless: Focus on systems and processes, never individuals
• Evidence-based: Every claim backed by data (logs, metrics, timeline)
• Action-oriented: Every finding leads to a concrete action item
• Learning-focused: What can we improve systemically?

Generation procedure

Step 1: Gather incident context

From the current conversation and agent memory, extract:

1. Incident metadata:

   • Incident ID (from PagerDuty/ServiceNow if connected)
   • Severity level
   • Duration (detection to resolution)
   • Affected services and resources
   • Impacted users/customers (if known)

2. Timeline: Reconstruct from the investigation:

   • When did the issue start? (first anomaly in metrics)
   • When was it detected? (alert fired)
   • When was it acknowledged? (engineer engaged)
   • Key investigation milestones
   • When was mitigation applied?
   • When was full resolution confirmed?

3. Root cause: From the agent's RCA:

   • What failed?
   • Why did it fail?
   • Contributing factors

4. Mitigation applied: What was done to resolve it?

Step 2: Assess detection and response

Analyze the incident response quality:

1. Time to detect (TTD): From issue start to alert firing

   • Was this acceptable? Could monitoring have caught it earlier?

2. Time to acknowledge (TTA): From alert to human engagement

   • Were on-call rotations effective?

3. Time to mitigate (TTM): From engagement to mitigation

   • Was the runbook adequate? Did the team have the right access?

4. Time to resolve (TTR): Total duration

   • Compare with SLA/SLO targets

Step 3: Five Whys analysis

Apply the 5 Whys technique to the root cause:

1. Why did the service return 500 errors?
   → The application pod was OOM-killed
2. Why was the pod OOM-killed?
   → Memory usage exceeded the 512Mi limit
3. Why did memory usage spike?
   → A new dependency introduced a memory leak in the connection pool
4. Why wasn't the leak caught before production?
   → Load testing doesn't cover the connection pool under sustained load
5. Why doesn't load testing cover this scenario?
   → Load test profiles haven't been updated since the architecture change

Step 4: Generate action items

For each finding, create a SMART action item:

ID	Action	Owner	Priority	Due date	Status
AI-1	Add memory-based autoscaling to payment-service	Platform team	High	+7 days	Open
AI-2	Update load test to include sustained connection pool scenarios	QA team	High	+14 days	Open
AI-3	Add memory utilization alert at 80% threshold	SRE team	Medium	+3 days	Open
AI-4	Review connection pool settings across all services	Dev team	Medium	+14 days	Open

Categories:

• Prevent recurrence: Fix the root cause
• Improve detection: Better monitoring/alerting
• Improve response: Better runbooks/automation
• Improve resilience: Architectural improvements

Step 5: Compile the postmortem document

Expected output

Report header (mandatory — use this exact format)

Incident Postmortem Report

Field	Value
Subscription	(name + ID)
Incident Date	YYYY-MM-DD
Severity	Sev-X
Duration	Xh Ym
Status	Draft — pending team review

Postmortem document structure

# Incident Postmortem: [Title]

## Executive summary
[2-3 sentences: what happened, impact, resolution]

## Impact
- **Services affected**: [list]
- **User impact**: [description and scope]
- **SLA/SLO impact**: [metrics affected]
- **Business impact**: [revenue, reputation, etc. if known]

## Timeline (all times UTC)

| Time | Event |
|------|-------|
| HH:MM | First anomaly detected in metrics |
| HH:MM | Alert fired: [alert name] |
| HH:MM | On-call engineer acknowledged |
| HH:MM | Investigation started |
| HH:MM | Root cause identified |
| HH:MM | Mitigation applied |
| HH:MM | Service fully recovered |

## Root cause
[Detailed technical explanation]

## Five Whys
[Analysis chain]

## Detection & response assessment

| Metric | Value | Target | Assessment |
|--------|-------|--------|------------|
| Time to detect | Xm | <5m | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Time to acknowledge | Xm | <15m | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Time to mitigate | Xm | <30m | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Time to resolve | Xm | <2h | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

## What went well
- [Positive aspects of the response]

## What could be improved
- [Areas for improvement]

## Action items
[Table from Step 4]

## Lessons learned
- [Key takeaways for the team]

---
*This postmortem was auto-generated by Azure SRE Agent and should be reviewed by the incident team before publishing.*

Delivery

• Output the full document in the chat
• If Teams connector is available, offer to post to the incident channel
• If ServiceNow/PagerDuty is connected, offer to attach to the incident record
• Suggest scheduling a postmortem review meeting

References

• Postmortem Culture: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/well-architected/operational-excellence/mitigation-strategy
• Azure Resource Health: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/service-health/resource-health-overview
• Activity Log: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-monitor/essentials/activity-log
• Service Health: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/service-health/overview