Agent skill

pre-mortem

Guide prospective hindsight analysis to identify project risks before failure occurs. Teams imagine the project has failed spectacularly, then work backward to identify causes. Increases risk identification by 30% compared to traditional planning.

Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/data/pre-mortem

Metadata

Additional technical details for this skill

model
claude-sonnet-4-5
author
SkillForge
version
1.0.0
academic source
HBR 2007 - Performing a Project Premortem by Gary Klein

SKILL.md

Pre-Mortem Risk Identification

When this skill activates, you become a pre-mortem facilitator. Your role is to guide users through prospective hindsight analysis, helping them identify project risks by imagining failure has already occurred.

Triggers

Activate when the user:

  • "Run a pre-mortem on..."
  • "What could cause this project to fail?"
  • "Identify project risks for..."
  • "What could go wrong with..."
  • "Risk identification for..."
  • "Pre-mortem analysis"

Quick Reference

Phase Duration Output
1. Brief 2-3 min Project context documented
2. Failure Announcement 30 sec Mindset shift established
3. Independent Analysis 3-5 min Individual failure reasons
4. Round-Robin Collection 5-10 min Consolidated failure list
5. Review and Mitigate 10-15 min Risk inventory with mitigations

Why Pre-Mortem Works

Research by Gary Klein demonstrates that prospective hindsight (imagining an event has already occurred) increases the ability to identify reasons for outcomes by 30%.

Key psychological benefits:

  1. Reduces "damn-the-torpedoes" attitude - Acknowledging failure is possible
  2. Creates psychological safety - Dissenters can voice concerns as analysis, not criticism
  3. Surfaces hidden knowledge - People share what they know but fear saying
  4. Catches blind spots early - Before commitment and sunk costs

Process

Phase 1: Project Brief (2-3 minutes)

Input Required:

  • Project name and objective
  • Timeline and key milestones
  • Team composition (if team context)
  • Success criteria

Actions:

  1. Document the project scope clearly
  2. Identify key stakeholders
  3. Note any constraints or dependencies
  4. Confirm understanding with user

Output: Project context document

Phase 2: Failure Announcement (30 seconds)

The critical mindset shift.

Announce to the user (or team):

"The project has failed. It is [timeline endpoint]. The project did not just miss its goals, it failed spectacularly. Your task now is to identify all the reasons why it failed."

Important: Use past tense. The failure has already happened. This is not speculation about what "might" happen; it "did" happen.

Phase 3: Independent Analysis (3-5 minutes)

For individual context:

  • User writes down 5-10 reasons why the project failed
  • No filtering or evaluation yet
  • Include both obvious and "unlikely" causes
  • Consider technical, human, organizational, and external factors

For team context:

  • Each person writes independently
  • No discussion or sharing yet
  • Silent reflection maximizes diversity of thought

Prompt the user:

"Write down every reason you can think of for why this project failed. Include causes you consider unlikely. Do not filter yourself. You have 3-5 minutes."

Output: Raw list of failure reasons

Phase 4: Round-Robin Collection (5-10 minutes)

For individual context:

  • Review each failure reason
  • Group by category (see Categories below)
  • No evaluation yet, just collection

For team context:

  • Go around the room, each person shares ONE reason
  • Continue rounds until all reasons exhausted
  • Record without discussion or debate
  • No "that won't happen" or "we already thought of that"

Categories for grouping:

  1. Technical - Technology, architecture, implementation
  2. People - Skills, availability, communication
  3. Process - Methodology, workflow, coordination
  4. Organizational - Politics, priorities, resources
  5. External - Market, competitors, regulations, dependencies
  6. Unknown Unknowns - Black swan events, assumptions

Output: Categorized failure reasons

Phase 5: Review and Mitigate (10-15 minutes)

For each failure reason:

  1. Assess likelihood (1-5 scale)

    • 1: Very unlikely
    • 2: Unlikely
    • 3: Possible
    • 4: Likely
    • 5: Very likely
  2. Assess impact (1-5 scale)

    • 1: Minor inconvenience
    • 2: Delays
    • 3: Significant setback
    • 4: Major failure
    • 5: Project-killing
  3. Calculate risk score: Likelihood x Impact

  4. Identify mitigation strategies:

    • Prevention: How to stop it from happening
    • Detection: How to know early if it is happening
    • Response: What to do if it happens
  5. Assign ownership (if team context)

Prioritization:

  • Risk score 15-25: Critical, address immediately
  • Risk score 8-14: High, plan mitigation
  • Risk score 4-7: Medium, monitor
  • Risk score 1-3: Low, accept or defer

Output: Complete risk inventory (see template)

Output Template

Generate the risk inventory using this structure:

markdown
# Pre-Mortem Risk Inventory

**Project:** [Name]
**Date:** [Date]
**Participants:** [Names or "Individual Analysis"]

## Project Context

- **Objective:** [What success looks like]
- **Timeline:** [Start to end]
- **Key Dependencies:** [Critical external factors]

## Risk Summary

| Priority | Count | Top Risk |
|----------|-------|----------|
| Critical | N | [Highest scoring risk] |
| High | N | [Second highest category risk] |
| Medium | N | |
| Low | N | |

## Critical Risks (Score 15-25)

### R1: [Risk Name]

- **Category:** [Technical/People/Process/Organizational/External]
- **Failure Scenario:** [How this causes project failure]
- **Likelihood:** [1-5] | **Impact:** [1-5] | **Score:** [L x I]
- **Root Cause:** [Why this might happen]
- **Mitigation:**
  - Prevention: [How to avoid]
  - Detection: [Early warning signs]
  - Response: [Contingency plan]
- **Owner:** [Person responsible]
- **Status:** [Open/Mitigating/Accepted]

[Repeat for each critical risk]

## High Risks (Score 8-14)

[Same structure as Critical]

## Medium Risks (Score 4-7)

[Abbreviated: Name, Category, Score, One-line mitigation]

## Low Risks (Score 1-3)

[List only: Name and score]

## Action Items

| Action | Owner | Due Date | Risk Addressed |
|--------|-------|----------|----------------|
| [Specific action] | [Name] | [Date] | R1, R3 |

## Review Schedule

- **Next review:** [Date]
- **Review frequency:** [Weekly/Bi-weekly/Monthly]

Scripts

pre-mortem.py

Validates risk inventory completeness and calculates aggregate statistics.

bash
python3 .claude/skills/pre-mortem/scripts/pre-mortem.py \
  --inventory-path <path-to-risk-inventory.md> \
  --validate

Exit Codes:

  • 0: Valid inventory with all required fields
  • 1: Invalid arguments
  • 10: Validation failed (missing required sections)

Anti-Patterns

Avoid Why Instead
Skipping Phase 2 Mindset shift is critical for effectiveness Always announce failure explicitly
Allowing discussion during Phase 3 Reduces diversity of thought Enforce silent writing
Filtering "unlikely" causes Miss black swan events Include all causes, prioritize later
Stopping at identification Risk without mitigation is incomplete Always complete Phase 5
One-time exercise Projects evolve, new risks emerge Schedule periodic reviews

Facilitation Tips

For team settings:

  • Emphasize no blame or criticism
  • Senior members speak last in round-robin
  • Celebrate thorough risk identification
  • Treat skeptics as valuable, not negative

For individual use:

  • Role-play multiple perspectives (developer, user, manager)
  • Challenge your own assumptions explicitly
  • Consider "what would my critics say?"

Extension Points

  1. Custom Categories: Add domain-specific risk categories
  2. Risk Templates: Pre-built risks for common project types
  3. Integration: Link to issue trackers for action item follow-up
  4. Quantification: Add financial impact estimation

Related Skills

Skill Relationship
decision-critic Post-decision validation (pre-mortem is pre-decision)
planner Use pre-mortem output to inform planning
architect Technical risks feed into ADR considerations

References

  • Klein, G. (2007). "Performing a Project Premortem." Harvard Business Review.
  • Mitchell, D. J., et al. (1989). "Back to the Future: Temporal Perspective in the Explanation of Events." Journal of Behavioral Decision Making.

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results