Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

algolia-incident-runbook

Investigate an Algolia-backed search problem by separating availability, access, freshness, speed, relevance, and event collection symptoms. Use application, provider, and data pipeline evidence to choose reversible containment, verify recovery with representative queries, and record the incident handoff.

OriginalShow the original description

Diagnose and manage an Algolia-backed search incident with evidence, containment, and reversible recovery. Use when users see failed, stale, slow, or irrelevant search results. Trigger with "Algolia incident", "search outage", or "Algolia degraded".

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Investigating failed or slow search results
  • Tracing stale results to an indexing issue
  • Choosing a reversible containment action
  • Documenting recovery checks and incident follow-up

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md3.9 KB
  • references/official-docs.md1.3 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Algolia Search Incident Runbook

Overview

This skill runs a product-owned incident process without assuming the provider is or is not at fault. Severity and response targets come from the organization's runbook, while diagnosis uses application, provider, and data-pipeline evidence.

Prerequisites

  • A named repository, environment, and Algolia application or index in scope
  • The local lockfile and installed client types as implementation authority
  • A safe read-only query or explicitly disposable test target
  • Current first-party documentation for any provider behavior that affects the change

Tool Discipline

Use Read, Glob, and Grep to inspect local code, configuration names, tests, and dependency versions. Use WebFetch only for current official Algolia documentation. Use Write or Edit only after identifying the target files, constraints, and verification plan.

Current Contract

  • Separate availability, authorization, freshness, latency, relevance, and event-collection symptoms.
  • Check provider status as one signal, not as the root-cause conclusion.
  • Preserve request IDs, task IDs, deployment SHAs, settings changes, and source snapshots.
  • Prefer traffic rollback, prior index targets, or feature degradation paths that are already tested.

Authentication

Use read-only or narrowly scoped incident credentials. Never paste keys into tickets, chat, commands, screenshots, or diagnostic bundles.

Instructions

  1. Declare incident owner, affected journey, start time, severity source, and current user impact.
  2. Freeze unrelated changes and capture recent releases, indexing runs, key changes, and provider status.
  3. Run a known read-only query and compare application, direct client, and source-of-truth results.
  4. Classify the failure surface and choose the smallest reversible containment.
  5. Verify recovery with synthetic and representative user queries, not only HTTP success.
  6. Record timeline, evidence, decisions, cleanup, follow-up owners, and rollback readiness.

Approval Boundaries

Do not invent severity targets, rotate credentials, rebuild production, change relevance settings, or delete an index without the incident commander's approval.

Output

Return the incident classification, timeline, evidence links, containment action, recovery checks, customer impact, unresolved risks, and follow-up tasks.

Error Handling

ConditionResponse
Provider status unclearContinue application and data-path diagnosis while monitoring official status.
Credential suspected exposedEscalate rotation through the approved secret process.
Freshness mismatchTrace source snapshot and task completion before reindexing.
Recovery changes relevanceRollback or obtain product-owner acceptance.

Examples

Use this compact input and expected handoff to calibrate scope and evidence quality.

Input:

incident=SEV-from-company-runbook; symptom=stale-products; provider-status=operational

Expected handoff:

cause=indexing-task-failed; containment=previous-index; verification=12/12-queries-pass

Resources

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Add a synthetic-data CI gate for customer-owned Abridge integration code. Test consent handling, note-review handoffs, redaction, and rollback behavior with mocked vendor boundaries, without connecting CI to a live Abridge or EHR tenant.

  • Adding regression checks to an Abridge integration repository
  • Testing consent and note-release handling
  • Checking logs for sensitive data exposure
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Triage Abridge recording, note review, Epic handoff, and access problems using observed symptoms and approved guidance. Identify the affected workflow stage, organize a minimal timeline, and prepare a redacted escalation record for the responsible team.

  • Separate recording problems from upload failures
  • Investigate note creation delays and editor issues
  • Identify the responsible team for Epic handoff failures
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Map and review an Abridge clinical documentation workflow from consent and recording through draft review, evidence checks, edits, and final disposition. Keep clinician approval explicit, identify failure exits, and separate verified facts from tenant-specific details and pending approvals.

  • Map a clinical note workflow for a care setting
  • Check where consent and patient identity are verified
  • Review draft notes against linked evidence before sign-off
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Audit how clinician-reviewed Abridge note sections map into Epic templates and downstream workflows. Use approved test records to document destinations, exceptions, evidence, rollback steps, and a go or no-go decision for a specific environment.

  • Checking Abridge note section mappings to Epic templates
  • Auditing a department’s approved documentation handoff
  • Preparing test evidence and a go or no-go decision
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Review Abridge adoption and workflow value using local usage records, clinician feedback, and verified contract costs. Build an evidence based decision table covering adoption, quality, support burden, and options to expand, hold, or improve the rollout.

  • Reviewing adoption after an Abridge rollout
  • Preparing evidence for a renewal decision
  • Comparing workflow outcomes across care settings
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Prepare a bounded support bundle for an Abridge issue using allowlisted operational details such as versions, coarse timestamps, and correlation references. Exclude recordings, transcripts, patient identifiers, credentials, and unrestricted logs, then document redactions and review details.

  • Preparing reviewed evidence for an Abridge support case
  • Documenting redactions and excluded data
  • Collecting approved operational details for an incident
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

See all skills by jeremylongshore

Report a problem with this skill