mirror of
https://github.com/magnus919/agent-skills.git
synced 2026-09-11 19:47:12 +03:00
Magnus HedemarkGitHubusername <username>factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>Create incident-learning skill that converts operational incident and near-miss evidence into verified, owned improvements across product, code, tests, evals, operations, and governance domains. - SKILL.md: progressive disclosure with loading guide, routing table, ownership boundaries, and core principles (evidence/inference/ uncertainty separation, ticket-closure rejection, no-blame design) - README.md: human-facing with all 5 required sections - references/discovery-brief.md: bounded survey comparing SRE, QA, verification, agent-evals, product-lifecycle-learning, implementation-planning, resilience-and-recovery, production-readiness - references/: evidence/inference taxonomy, escaped-from analysis, follow-up domains, verification and closure standard - templates/: incident-learning record, causal/evidence ledger, follow-up work map, verification and closure record - evals/evals.json: 5 schema-valid cases (noisy report, monitoring gap, process failure, agent authority failure, non-actionable rejection) - Regenerated catalogs and updated root README and skill-triggers Closes #200 Co-authored-by: username <username> Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
3.1 KiB
3.1 KiB
Causal/Evidence Ledger
Track each causal claim from the incident learning record with its supporting evidence, confidence, alternatives, and disposition. This ledger is the evidentiary backbone of the learning record — it ensures every causal statement is traceable to observed facts and that alternative explanations are not silently discarded.
Ledger
| Claim ID | Causal claim | Source (learning record hypothesis #) | Supporting evidence (fact #s) | Confidence | Alternative explanations considered | Evidence against alternatives | Disposition | Disposition date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Field definitions
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Claim ID | Unique identifier for this causal claim |
| Causal claim | The causal statement — what is claimed to have caused what |
| Source | Link to the hypothesis in the incident learning record |
| Supporting evidence | Observed facts (by fact #) that support this claim |
| Confidence | High / Medium / Low, with brief justification |
| Alternative explanations considered | Competing causal hypotheses that were evaluated |
| Evidence against alternatives | Why the alternatives were ruled out or downgraded |
| Disposition | Accepted / Rejected / Unresolved / Superseded by (claim ID) |
| Disposition date | When the disposition was determined |
Disposition rules
- Accepted: The causal claim is the best-supported explanation. Supporting evidence is strong; alternatives are ruled out or significantly less consistent.
- Rejected: The causal claim is inconsistent with the evidence. An alternative explanation is better supported.
- Unresolved: Evidence is insufficient to accept or reject. This becomes an unresolved uncertainty in the learning record and drives investigation follow-up work.
- Superseded by: A later analysis produced a better causal claim that replaces this one. Reference the superseding claim ID.
Confidence calibration
| Confidence | Evidence standard |
|---|---|
| High | Multiple independent evidence sources; alternatives tested and ruled out; causal mechanism well-understood and reproducible. |
| Medium | Some evidence supports the claim; alternatives are plausible but less consistent with the evidence; causal mechanism is understood but not fully validated. |
| Low | Claim is consistent with evidence but not strongly supported; alternatives are equally or nearly equally plausible; causal mechanism is speculative. |
Ledger integrity rules
- Every causal claim in the learning record must appear in the ledger.
- Every accepted claim must have at least one supporting evidence reference (fact #) and at least one alternative explanation that was considered.
- No claim may be accepted with "low" confidence without explicit justification for why the best-available explanation is sufficient for follow-up work despite low confidence.
- Rejected claims remain in the ledger — they are not deleted. The rejection reason is recorded.
- Unresolved claims must have a linked investigation follow-up item in the follow-up work map.