chaos
Controlled fault injection and resilience validation. Use when testing failover or dependency assumptions.
Install via CLI (Recommended)
clawhub install openclaw/skills/skills/clawkk/chaosChaos Engineering
Structured guidance for chaos engineering (fault injection, game days): confirm triggers, propose the stages below, and adapt if the user wants a lighter pass.
When to Offer This Workflow
Trigger conditions:
- User mentions chaos engineering or closely related work
- They want a structured workflow rather than ad-hoc tips
- They are preparing a review, rollout, or stakeholder communication
Initial offer: Explain the four stages briefly and ask whether to follow this workflow or work freeform. If they decline, continue in their preferred style.
Workflow Stages
Stage 1: Clarify context & goals
Anchor on blast radius control. Ask what success looks like, constraints, and what must not break. Capture unknowns early.
Stage 2: Design or plan the approach
Translate goals into a concrete plan around hypotheses and abort criteria. Compare alternatives and explicit trade-offs; avoid implicit assumptions.
Stage 3: Implement, validate, and harden
Execute with verification loops tied to observability during faults. Prefer small steps, measurable checks, and rollback points where risk is high.
Stage 4: Operate, communicate, and iterate
Close the loop with learning loop and fixes: monitoring, documentation, stakeholder updates, and lessons learned for the next cycle.
Checklist Before Completion
- Goals and constraints are explicit for chaos engineering
- Risks and trade-offs are stated, not hand-waved
- Verification steps match the change’s impact (tests, canary, peer review)
- Operational follow-through is covered (monitoring, docs, owners)
Tips for Effective Guidance
- Be procedural: stage-by-stage, with clear exit criteria
- Ask for missing context (environment, scale, deadlines) before prescribing
- Prefer checklists and concrete examples over generic platitudes
- If the user declines the workflow, switch to freeform help without lecturing
Handling Deviations
- If the user wants to skip a stage: confirm and continue with what they need.
- If context is missing: ask targeted questions before strong recommendations.
- Prefer concrete examples, trade-offs, and verification steps over generic advice.
Quality Bar
- Each recommendation should be actionable (what to do next).
- Call out failure modes relevant to chaos experiments (security, scale, UX, or ops).
- Keep tone direct and respectful of the user’s time.
Metadata
Not sure this is the right skill?
Describe what you want to build — we'll match you to the best skill from 16,000+ options.
Find the right skillPaste this into your clawhub.json to enable this plugin.
{
"plugins": {
"official-clawkk-chaos": {
"enabled": true,
"auto_update": true
}
}
}Related Skills
data-move
Deep data migration workflow—scope, mapping, validation, batching and ordering, dual-write and cutover, rollback, and reconciliation. Use when moving tenants, bulk backfills, or changing stores without losing trust in data correctness.
data-model
Deep data modeling workflow—grain, facts and dimensions, keys, slowly changing dimensions, normalization trade-offs, and analytics query patterns. Use when designing warehouse/analytics models or reviewing star/snowflake schemas.
guard
Deep AI safety guardrails workflow—policy definition, input/output filtering, monitoring, escalation, and false-positive handling. Use when reducing harmful outputs, misuse, or policy violations in LLM products.
客诉处理
提供客诉处理的可落地指南与SOP。在开展客诉处理相关工作时调用。
cost-opt
Cloud cost review: rightsizing, reservations, waste. Use when reducing infra spend.