SkillVaultskills Browse all 1,000+ skills

Debugging · Version 1.1.0 · Reviewed 2026-08-02

Pulumi Production Debug Specialist

Diagnose pulumi production incident triage and pulumi root-cause isolation with evidence, explicit trade-offs, and a verification plan.

4 method steps 6 documented failure modes 5 diagnostic checks 7 quality gates

Diagnoses production failures from runtime evidence instead of symptom matching in Pulumi using infrastructure program, stack configuration, state, providers, and previews and preview operations, resource diffs, dependency graph, and provider logs, with explicit attention to nondeterministic program input or renamed logical identity replacing resources during deployment.

₹199 one-time

Get this skill archive

Install in your AI coding tool

SkillVault packages this skill in the open Agent Skills format for five leading coding tools.

What this skill helps you do

  • Pulumi production incident triage
  • Pulumi root-cause isolation
  • Pulumi fix verification

How Pulumi Production Debug Specialist works

You provide

Symptoms, timestamps, recent changes, and logs

It inspects

Correlated subset and first failing component for pulumi production incident triage

It decides

A ranked cause for pulumi root-cause isolation that explains recovery too

You verify

The cheapest discriminating test, run before the fix

What it checks first

Pulumi Production Debug Specialist diagnoses production failures from runtime evidence instead of symptom matching in Pulumi using infrastructure program, stack configuration, state, providers, and previews and preview operations, resource diffs, dependency graph, and provider logs, with explicit attention to nondeterministic program input or renamed logical identity replacing resources during deployment. Use it when the work involves Pulumi production incident triage, Pulumi root-cause isolation, Pulumi fix verification.

  1. Every resource replacement in the plan, and whether that resource holds state that cannot be recreated.
  2. Address stability across refactors, since re-indexing destroys and recreates unrelated resources.
  3. Whether the executing principal has broader permissions than the change requires.
  4. Provider version pinning, because an unpinned upgrade introduces unrequested plan changes.
  5. Whether secrets appear in state, which is stored in plaintext regardless of the sensitive marker.

Failure modes it recognizes

  • An immutable attribute change silently forcing replacement of a database or stateful volume.
  • Moving resources between modules without move blocks, causing destroy-and-recreate.
  • A data source resolving at plan time to a value that changes before apply, producing inconsistency.
  • State lock held by a crashed run, blocking every subsequent apply until manually cleared.
  • A count-to-for_each conversion re-creating every resource because addresses changed.
  • Drift silenced with ignore_changes, which permanently disables reconciliation for that path.

Answers it will reject

  • Approving from the plan summary counts instead of reading every replacement line.
  • Using targeted applies to work around a broken dependency graph, leaving state partially applied.
  • Committing state files to version control, exposing secrets and creating infrastructure merge conflicts.
  • Granting the pipeline administrative rights so that any plan will succeed.

Decision rules it applies

  • Any replacement of a stateful resource requires a tested backup and restore path before approval.
  • Prefer move blocks over destroy-and-recreate for refactors; they preserve state and cost nothing.
  • Pin provider versions and upgrade deliberately so plan noise is attributable to intent.
  • If the plan cannot be explained line by line, it has not been reviewed.

Evidence it asks for

  • Export the plan as JSON and programmatically list every replace action.
  • Cross-check each replacement against an inventory of stateful resources.
  • Rehearse the change in a non-production environment carrying representative state.

The method inside

  1. Reconstruct the symptom timeline and define what healthy behavior would look like for pulumi production incident triage.
  2. Rank hypotheses for pulumi root-cause isolation by evidence, blast radius, and ability to explain every observed symptom.
  3. Run the cheapest discriminating check for pulumi fix verification; update confidence only when evidence changes.
  4. Separate immediate stabilization, confirmed cause, contributing conditions, and prevention; finish with a reproducible verification.

Deliverables

  • Pulumi production incident triage assessment
  • Pulumi root-cause isolation decision and action plan
  • Pulumi fix verification verification checklist

Evidence requirements

  • Exact symptoms and timestamps
  • Reproduction conditions and recent changes
  • Logs, traces, metrics, code, or configuration

Quality gates

  • Every material claim traces to supplied evidence or is labeled as a hypothesis.
  • The response follows the declared deliverable contract.
  • No execution, access, measurement, or verification is invented.
  • Secrets and personal data are redacted rather than repeated.
  • The user receives a concrete independent verification step.
  • The relevant failure modes in this domain were considered rather than only the reported symptom.
  • No listed anti-pattern was recommended as a solution.

Example task

Input

Apply the production debug specialist to our Pulumi system before the next production change. We can provide infrastructure program, stack configuration, state, providers, and previews; the main concern is nondeterministic program input or renamed logical identity replacing resources during deployment.

Expected output

Start with preview operations, resource diffs, dependency graph, and provider logs and split the affected population before changing configuration. The leading hypothesis is nondeterministic program input or renamed logical identity replacing resources during deployment. Run the smallest test that distinguishes that mechanism from dependency failure, preserve the evidence, and verify recovery against the original symptom.

Boundaries and compatibility

Ideal for

  • Pulumi production incident triage: produce a decision or artifact grounded in supplied evidence.
  • Pulumi root-cause isolation: produce a decision or artifact grounded in supplied evidence.
  • Pulumi fix verification: produce a decision or artifact grounded in supplied evidence.

Out of scope

  • Guessing a root cause from a symptom alone
  • Claiming a fix worked without test evidence

Agent compatibility

  • GitHub Copilot Agent Skills
  • Cursor Agent Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • OpenAI Codex Skills
  • JetBrains Junie Skills

Tool policy: Advisory by default. No tools are assumed. If the host provides tools, use read-only evidence gathering unless the user explicitly approves a scoped write or execution action.