# Sdlc Maintain > Incident to diagnosed intent plus lesson. Triggers: bug report, incident, alert, ticket. - Skill: `cskwork/sdlc-maintain` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add cskwork/sdlc-maintain` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/cskwork/sdlc-maintain/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Docs & Writing - Author: cskwork (https://skillmd.com/u/cskwork) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/cskwork/sdlc-maintain --- # Stage 6: Maintain Goal: turn each bug report, incident, alert, or ticket into a diagnosed `intent.md`. Restart the process with evidence, not a vague complaint. People triage and review the work. They do not create the initial diagnosis. Heartbeat: as soon as `.sdlc/work//` exists, and at every sub-task change, overwrite `.sdlc/work//progress.md` with one line — `maintain · · ` (AGENTS.md rule 9). ## Running headless? Sandbox first This stage may start without a human through cron, a webhook, or a ticket. Run it stateless in a sandbox with scoped, read-only access to logs, metrics, and code. Do not provide standing production credentials or deploy tools. The agent may act only through gated routes: write an `intent.md`, open a review PR, or run a pre-approved runbook. A wrong diagnosis may produce a wrong document, but it must never change production. Handle rollback through the plan gate or the project's rehearsed rollback runbook. Never revert production directly from this stage. ## Intake (before any research or hypothesis) Ask the reporter these five questions in one message. Skip any already answered. Each answer kills hypothesis classes for free; a researcher fan-out dispatched before these answers wastes most of its budget. 1. Which exact control did you use? (button label / menu item / gesture) 2. What did you see immediately after? (nothing at all, a popup, an error, a partial change) — "nothing at all" and "something wrong appeared" are different bug classes. 3. Which environment and when? (prod/stg/dev, URL, approximate time — this picks the deploy ref and the log window) 4. What account/role? (permissions often hide or disable the control) 5. Do you have a console log, network capture, or screenshot? If not, can you reproduce once with DevTools open? Record the answers in `intent.md` under Evidence. Track question 5 explicitly (see Evidence tracking below). ## Diagnose 0. **Check the deployed ref first.** Run `tools/refcheck.sh origin/ ` from the repo root. On DRIFT, read every file via `git show :` and name the ref for each fact in every report. A diagnosis of the working tree may describe code nobody is running. 1. Run the cheap probes in `probes.md` (same directory) that match the symptom BEFORE dispatching researcher fan-out. Probes cost seconds and set direction; fan-out is for breadth the probes cannot cover. 2. Before forming a hypothesis or offering options, run fresh-context history and feasibility research under skill 1. Check whether this failure was fixed or reverted before, why, and whether it can be reproduced here. 3. Reproduce the issue first. If it cannot be reproduced, say so and record what is known. Do not fix an issue you cannot reproduce. 4. Trace the cause. Read `.sdlc/memory/POLICY.md`, `.sdlc/memory/INDEX.md`, and `.sdlc/memory/DOMAIN.md`, then open lesson files whose tags match the task. Check whether this failure mode has occurred before; if a past lesson matches, cite it in the diagnosis. 5. Separate the claim before hunting: "it does not react" is a state/handler problem; "it looks wrong/disabled" is a RENDERING problem until proven otherwise. They have different checklists. 6. **Class sweep.** When a found defect is an instance of a pattern (missing filter, guard, timeout, lock), grep the same file/module for the whole class and report a count table. Before changing any shared symbol, produce the call-site × guard table. One instance is a bug; the table is the scope, and it decides fix ordering. 7. Check the feature's `evidence.md` — a shipped feature is archived, so it sits at `.sdlc/archive//evidence.md`: was this covered by proof, or was it a verification gap? A gap is itself a lesson (`promote: skills/5-ship`). ## Evidence tracking Reproduction evidence requested from a human tends to evaporate in chat. Make its state explicit in `intent.md`: - reproduction evidence: requested 2026-08-29 (console+network capture) → update to: received | waived-by-human A diagnosis that ships while evidence is `requested` must say so in its report and in any ticket it produces. Do not silently drop the request. Ask at most twice. After the second unanswered request, either proceed with `waived-by-agent — unreproduced; diagnosis stays [assumed]` carried into every downstream artifact, or close the fix-slug handed-off with the reporter's ticket key. Never re-request a third time. If `.sdlc/config.md` has empty `test:`/`lint:` commands, record one line of verification debt in the artifact: what could not be run, and what manual check replaced it. ## Adversarial review of the diagnosis (before the fix plan is approved) A confident diagnosis built without reproduction NEEDS hostile review. Dispatch fresh-context adversaries (rule 5 of AGENTS.md) with these four standing assignments — each has caught real errors: 1. **Recount.** Redo every enumeration independently (counts of queries, call sites, guards). Watch for aliases and pattern variants the first pass missed. 2. **Propagation proof.** For each claimed error mechanism, prove the error can actually REACH the code the fix would touch. A layer that swallows its own errors refutes the fix above it. 3. **Zero-risk attack.** Attack every "zero risk", "never happens", "always" phrase. Enumerate the states where the impossible thing is normal today. 4. **Rival hypothesis.** Propose at least one alternative that fits the same evidence, and name the single observation that would distinguish it. ## Route by size - **Compressed loop.** Use it only when one cause is reproduced, the changed file set is known, and affected behavior is limited. Create a new `.sdlc/work//` directory so prior approvals stay intact. Write a mini `plan.md` with files and proof. Pass the plan gate as usual (tiered / lazymode, AGENTS.md rule 3), then build and verify under skill 4. Create `evidence.md` and stop at the ship gate. - **Full loop.** Use it for all other changes. Create `.sdlc/work//intent.md` from `templates/intent.md`. Include the reproduction and diagnosis as verified evidence, then run Stage 1. **Recurrence cap: three fix loops for one symptom.** Before opening a fix-slug, grep the symptom's tags in INDEX.md AND open features' harvests (`grep -l .sdlc/work/*/harvest.md`) — in-flight lessons are not merged yet. On the third match the defect is architectural, not a bug: STOP, write the promotion edit the tag already earned, and take it to the human as a design decision — not a fourth fix. Record the outcome in DOMAIN.md as a constraint at close. Per-feature caps do not bound a defect that mints a new slug per incident; this rule does. ## Record the lesson (every incident, no exceptions) Draft the lesson in the fix feature's `.sdlc/work//harvest.md` (INDEX.md, DOMAIN.md, and lessons/ are written only at close — AGENTS.md rule 4). The close merge materializes it as `.sdlc/memory/lessons/YYYY-MM-DD-.md` via `templates/lesson.md` plus ONE line in `.sdlc/memory/INDEX.md`: ``` - [tags,comma,separated] one-line summary → lessons/YYYY-MM-DD-.md ``` Memory discipline (context stays bounded): - Keep INDEX.md at 50 lines or fewer. If it grows past the limit, merge near-duplicates, drop superseded entries (their subject changed), and replace promoted entries with one line — `- [tags] promoted → skills/ (was 3×)` — so the recurrence count survives the prune. - When the same lesson recurs for a second time, propose the exact skill edit that would prevent it. (Distinct from the 3× tag rule in skills/5-ship: this fires on the same lesson, that one on the same tag.) - State the trap and the correct move in each lesson. Keep it short and specific enough to change behavior.