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/rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineer/observability-gapnpx skills add rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineer --skill observability-gapgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineerWrote 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/rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineer/observability-gap)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineer/observability-gap"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineer/observability-gap.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 5.1 | $0.00099 | $0.02109 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00049 | $0.01055 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00422 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00211 |
Grade A, and why
observability-gap 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 6d 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 — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Observability gap
Making the next incident cheaper than this one.
Why this exists
After an incident everyone discusses the cause. Almost nobody discusses why it took forty minutes to find — and that second question is usually the more valuable one, because the cause was specific to this incident while the diagnosis difficulty will recur across every future one.
If the answer was hard to find, that is a fixable defect. A missing log line, an absent metric, a dashboard that shows the symptom but not the cause, an alert that fires on the wrong thing. Each one costs time in every incident that touches that area, forever, and each is usually a small change.
This is the compounding skill in the portfolio. It's also the one most easily deferred, because the incident is over and the pressure is gone. That's precisely why it needs to be a deliberate step rather than an intention.
The other half is prospective: before shipping, asking whether this change's failure would be silent. A failure nobody detects is far more dangerous than one that pages someone at 3am.
When this applies
- After any incident where diagnosis was hard
- Before shipping anything whose failure would be silent
- A change has no way to be detected going wrong
- Diagnosis required guessing rather than looking
nfr-baselineflagged a silent-failure risk
When it doesn't
- During an active incident — fix it first, come back after
- The system is already well instrumented in the relevant area
- Adding telemetry nobody will look at, which is cost without benefit
Prerequisites
- Locate the workspace:
FDE_WORKSPACE, else the charter Location, else.fde/, else../<repo>-fde/ .fde/incidents/*.md— specifically the "what made this hard" section.fde/03b-nfrs.md— the silent-failure analysis.fde/08-release-readiness.md— the observability dimension
Procedure
1. Start from a real diagnosis, not from a checklist
The best input is a specific incident and the specific moments where you were stuck. incident-triage records these under "what made this hard" for exactly this reason.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 175 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 27a92e5953db
observability-gap is a skill published in the GitHub repository rpraharaj/forward-deployed-engineer (6 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 99 tokens to every session and 2,109 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
fishbone-diagram
Use when a problem may have multiple operational, human, process, system, or environmental causes. Use when applying the Fishbone Diagram consulting method and when a user asks for Fishbone Diagram, method execution, structured diagnosis, or action planning.
five-whys-root-cause
Use when a problem keeps recurring, the first explanation is too shallow, or the action plan risks treating symptoms. Use when applying the Five Whys Root Cause consulting method and when a user asks for Five Whys Root Cause, method execution, structured diagnosis, or action planning.
debug-optimize-lcp
Guides debugging and optimizing Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) using Chrome DevTools MCP tools. Use this skill whenever the user asks about LCP performance, slow page loads, Core Web Vitals optimization, or wants to understand why their page's main content takes too long to appear. Also use when the user mentions…
systematic-debugging
Use when debugging a failing test, build error, or runtime issue that isn't immediately obvious. Guides a 4-phase root cause analysis instead of random fix attempts.
diagnose
Trace from a reproduced symptom to the source code that causes it. Pin the specific file and approximate line, rate confidence in the cause and clarity of the fix independently, and always propose a concrete fix.
azsdk-common-pipeline-analysis
Analyze Azure SDK CI/CD pipeline failures into a structured diagnosis, and define the required output format. Load this skill before calling azsdkanalyzepipeline, which returns raw failure data that this skill interprets and formats. USE FOR: "pipeline failed", "build failure", "CI check failing", "tests failing in…