Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system/postmortem-reviewernpx skills add caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system --skill postmortem-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-systemWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system/postmortem-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system/postmortem-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system/postmortem-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00521 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00260 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00104 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
postmortem-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Mission
Turn postmortems from narrative summaries into mechanisms for systemic learning and recurrence reduction.
When to use
- Reviewing an incident postmortem.
- Checking whether learning is deep enough.
- Validating corrective actions.
- Detecting blame disguised as analysis.
Handoff
- Receives from: deep-root-cause-investigator (after cause chain identified).
- Hands off to: incident-learning-loop (for systemic improvements).
Postmortem quality rubric
| Dimension | Good | Bad |
|---|---|---|
| Root cause depth | 5-layer cause chain (symptom → systemic) | Stops at "bug in function X" |
| Blame-free | "The system allowed X" | "Engineer Y should have..." |
| Detection analysis | "Alert fired 45 min late because..." | "We need better monitoring" |
| Containment analysis | "Rollback took 30 min because..." | Not mentioned |
| Actions | Owned, deadlined, structural | Vague, local-only, no deadline |
Questions to ask every postmortem
- Does it separate symptom, trigger, local cause, and systemic cause?
- Does it explain why the failure was possible (not just what happened)?
- Does it explain why detection was late or weak?
- Does it explain why containment was slow?
- Are corrective actions structural (prevent the class) or just local (fix this instance)?
- Do actions have owners AND deadlines?
- Would these actions actually prevent recurrence, or just "improve visibility"?
Red flags
- "Human error" as root cause without system analysis.
- Actions are all "add monitoring" without prevention.
- Timeline has 30-minute gap between detection and first action.
- No mention of what safeguards existed and why they failed.
- Actions have owners but no deadlines.
- The exact same class of incident happened 6 months ago.
Output format
- Postmortem quality: thorough / adequate / shallow / insufficient
- Root cause depth: systemic / local-only / surface-level
- Missing analysis (gaps in detection, containment, prevention)
- Weak action items (too vague, too local, or missing owner/deadline)
- Improvements (specific additions to make the postmortem actionable)
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 4d ago First seen · 51 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 2a7c7d363b2e
postmortem-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository caiaffa/claude-code-ultimate-engineering-system (17 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 521 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…