Analyse Problem

NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit/skills/analyse-problem

by NeoLabHQ23e2428e809d77717f8acc9659c374a3a1fcb93eNo licenseListed Oct 9, 2026Updated Oct 9, 2026

Comprehensive A3 one-page problem analysis with root cause and action plan

Instructions onlyProductivity & Workflow
AI-generated overview

Guides an A3 one-page problem analysis covering background, current condition, goals, root cause, countermeasures, plan and follow-up.

What it does
This skill applies the A3 problem-solving format to document a problem on a single page. It walks through seven sections: background, current condition, goal or target, root cause analysis using 5 Whys or Fishbone, countermeasures, an implementation plan with owners and timelines, and follow-up verification. It produces a structured markdown or text A3 report, and includes two worked examples covering database connection pool exhaustion and a SQL injection vulnerability.
When to use it
Use it for incidents, recurring issues or major improvement efforts that need concise, complete documentation and a resolution plan. It is intended for structured root-cause work rather than small bugs, one-line fixes or trivial issues.
Requirements
No scripts or special tooling; it is instructions only. The agent needs the problem description as input, and output is markdown or plain text.

A3 Problem Analysis

Apply A3 problem-solving format for comprehensive, single-page problem documentation and resolution planning.

Description

Structured one-page analysis format covering: Background, Current Condition, Goal, Root Cause Analysis, Countermeasures, Implementation Plan, and Follow-up. Named after A3 paper size; emphasizes concise, complete documentation.

Usage

/analyse-problem [problem_description]

Variables

  • PROBLEM: Issue to analyze (default: prompt for input)
  • OUTPUT_FORMAT: markdown or text (default: markdown)

Steps

  1. Background: Why this problem matters (context, business impact)
  2. Current Condition: What's happening now (data, metrics, examples)
  3. Goal/Target: What success looks like (specific, measurable)
  4. Root Cause Analysis: Why problem exists (use 5 Whys or Fishbone)
  5. Countermeasures: Proposed solutions addressing root causes
  6. Implementation Plan: Who, what, when, how
  7. Follow-up: How to verify success and prevent recurrence

A3 Template

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════                    A3 PROBLEM ANALYSIS═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
TITLE: [Concise problem statement]OWNER: [Person responsible]DATE: [YYYY-MM-DD]
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 1. BACKGROUND (Why this matters)                            │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [Context, impact, urgency, who's affected]                  │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 2. CURRENT CONDITION (What's happening)                     │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [Facts, data, metrics, examples - no opinions]              │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 3. GOAL/TARGET (What success looks like)                    │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [Specific, measurable, time-bound targets]                  │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 4. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS (Why problem exists)                 │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [5 Whys, Fishbone, data analysis]                           │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 5. COUNTERMEASURES (Solutions addressing root causes)       │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [Specific actions, not vague intentions]                    │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 6. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (Who, What, When)                    │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [Timeline, responsibilities, dependencies, milestones]      │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 7. FOLLOW-UP (Verification & Prevention)                    │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ [Success metrics, monitoring plan, review dates]            │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Examples

Example 1: Database Connection Pool Exhaustion

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════                    A3 PROBLEM ANALYSIS═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
TITLE: API Downtime Due to Connection Pool ExhaustionOWNER: Backend Team LeadDATE: 2024-11-14
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 1. BACKGROUND                                                │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ • API goes down 2-3x per week during peak hours             ││ • Affects 10,000+ users, average 15min downtime             ││ • Revenue impact: ~$5K per incident                         ││ • Customer satisfaction score dropped from 4.5 to 3.8       ││ • Started 3 weeks ago after traffic increased 40%           │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 2. CURRENT CONDITION                                         │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Observations:                                                ││ • Connection pool size: 10 (unchanged since launch)         ││ • Peak concurrent users: 500 (was 300 three weeks ago)      ││ • Average request time: 200ms (was 150ms)                   ││ • Connections leaked: ~2 per hour (never released)          ││ • Error: "Connection pool exhausted" in logs                ││                                                              ││ Pattern:                                                     ││ • Occurs at 2pm-4pm daily (peak traffic)                    ││ • Gradual degradation over 30 minutes                       ││ • Recovery requires app restart                             ││ • Long-running queries block pool (some 30+ seconds)        │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 3. GOAL/TARGET                                               │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ • Zero downtime due to connection exhaustion                ││ • Support 1000 concurrent users (2x current peak)           ││ • All connections released within 5 seconds                 ││ • Achieve within 1 week                                     │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 4. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS                                       │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ 5 Whys:                                                      ││ Problem: Connection pool exhausted                          ││ Why 1: All 10 connections in use, none available            ││ Why 2: Connections not released after requests              ││ Why 3: Error handling doesn't close connections             ││ Why 4: Try-catch blocks missing .finally()                  ││ Why 5: No code review checklist for resource cleanup        ││                                                              ││ Contributing factors:                                        ││ • Pool size too small for current load                      ││ • No connection timeout configured (hangs forever)          ││ • Slow queries hold connections longer                      ││ • No monitoring/alerting on pool metrics                    ││                                                              ││ ROOT CAUSE: Systematic issue with resource cleanup +        ││             insufficient pool sizing                         │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 5. COUNTERMEASURES                                           │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Immediate (This Week):                                       ││ 1. Audit all DB code, add .finally() for connection release ││ 2. Increase pool size: 10 → 30                              ││ 3. Add connection timeout: 10 seconds                       ││ 4. Add pool monitoring & alerts (>80% used)                 ││                                                              ││ Short-term (2 Weeks):                                        ││ 5. Optimize slow queries (add indexes)                      ││ 6. Implement connection pooling best practices doc          ││ 7. Add automated test for connection leaks                  ││                                                              ││ Long-term (1 Month):                                         ││ 8. Migrate to connection pool library with auto-release     ││ 9. Add linter rule detecting missing .finally()             ││ 10. Create PR checklist for resource management             │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 6. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN                                       │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Week 1 (Nov 14-18):                                          ││ • Day 1-2: Audit & fix connection leaks [Dev Team]          ││ • Day 2: Increase pool size, add timeout [DevOps]           ││ • Day 3: Set up monitoring [SRE]                            ││ • Day 4: Test under load [QA]                               ││ • Day 5: Deploy to production [DevOps]                      ││                                                              ││ Week 2 (Nov 21-25):                                          ││ • Optimize identified slow queries [DB Team]                ││ • Write best practices doc [Tech Writer + Dev Lead]         ││ • Create connection leak test [QA Team]                     ││                                                              ││ Week 3-4 (Nov 28 - Dec 9):                                   ││ • Evaluate connection pool libraries [Dev Team]             ││ • Add linter rules [Dev Lead]                               ││ • Update PR template [Dev Lead]                             ││                                                              ││ Dependencies: None blocking Week 1 fixes                     ││ Resources: 2 developers, 1 DevOps, 1 SRE                    │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 7. FOLLOW-UP                                                 │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Success Metrics:                                             ││ • Zero downtime incidents (monitor 4 weeks)                 ││ • Pool usage stays <80% during peak                         ││ • No connection leaks detected                              ││ • Response time <200ms p95                                  ││                                                              ││ Monitoring:                                                  ││ • Daily: Check pool usage dashboard                         ││ • Weekly: Review connection leak alerts                     ││ • Bi-weekly: Team retrospective on progress                 ││                                                              ││ Review Dates:                                                ││ • Week 1 (Nov 18): Verify immediate fixes effective         ││ • Week 2 (Nov 25): Assess optimization impact               ││ • Week 4 (Dec 9): Final review, close A3                    ││                                                              ││ Prevention:                                                  ││ • Add connection handling to onboarding                     ││ • Monthly audit of resource management code                 ││ • Include pool metrics in SRE runbook                       │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Example 2: Security Vulnerability in Production

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════                    A3 PROBLEM ANALYSIS═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
TITLE: Critical SQL Injection VulnerabilityOWNER: Security Team LeadDATE: 2024-11-14
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 1. BACKGROUND                                                │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ • Critical security vulnerability reported by researcher    ││ • SQL injection in user search endpoint                     ││ • Potential data breach affecting 100K+ user records        ││ • CVSS score: 9.8 (Critical)                                ││ • Vulnerability exists in production for 6 months           ││ • Similar issue found in 2 other endpoints (scanning)       │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 2. CURRENT CONDITION                                         │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Vulnerable Code:                                             ││ • /api/users/search endpoint uses string concatenation      ││ • Input: search query (user-provided, not sanitized)        ││ • Pattern: `SELECT * FROM users WHERE name = '${input}'`    ││                                                              ││ Scope:                                                       ││ • 3 endpoints vulnerable (search, filter, export)           ││ • All use same unsafe pattern                               ││ • No parameterized queries                                  ││ • No input validation layer                                 ││                                                              ││ Risk Assessment:                                             ││ • Exploitable from public internet                          ││ • No evidence of exploitation (logs checked)                ││ • Similar code in admin panel (higher privilege)            │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 3. GOAL/TARGET                                               │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ • Patch all SQL injection vulnerabilities within 24 hours   ││ • Zero SQL injection vulnerabilities in codebase            ││ • Prevent similar issues in future code                     ││ • Verify no unauthorized access occurred                    │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 4. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS                                       │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ 5 Whys:                                                      ││ Problem: SQL injection vulnerability in production          ││ Why 1: User input concatenated directly into SQL            ││ Why 2: Developer wasn't aware of SQL injection risks        ││ Why 3: No security training for new developers              ││ Why 4: Security not part of onboarding checklist            ││ Why 5: Security team not involved in development process    ││                                                              ││ Contributing Factors (Fishbone):                             ││ • Process: No security code review                          ││ • Technology: ORM not used consistently                     ││ • People: Knowledge gap in secure coding                    ││ • Methods: No SAST tools in CI/CD                           ││                                                              ││ ROOT CAUSE: Security not integrated into development        ││             process, training gap                            │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 5. COUNTERMEASURES                                           │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Immediate (24 Hours):                                        ││ 1. Patch all 3 vulnerable endpoints                         ││ 2. Deploy hotfix to production                              ││ 3. Scan codebase for similar patterns                       ││ 4. Review access logs for exploitation attempts             ││                                                              ││ Short-term (1 Week):                                         ││ 5. Replace all raw SQL with parameterized queries           ││ 6. Add input validation middleware                          ││ 7. Set up SAST tool in CI (Snyk/SonarQube)                  ││ 8. Security team review of all data access code             ││                                                              ││ Long-term (1 Month):                                         ││ 9. Mandatory security training for all developers           ││ 10. Add security review to PR process                       ││ 11. Migrate to ORM for all database access                  ││ 12. Implement security champion program                     ││ 13. Quarterly security audits                               │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 6. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN                                       │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Hour 0-4 (Emergency Response):                               ││ • Write & test patches [Security + Senior Dev]              ││ • Emergency PR review [CTO + Tech Lead]                     ││ • Deploy to staging [DevOps]                                ││                                                              ││ Hour 4-24 (Production Deploy):                               ││ • Deploy hotfix [DevOps + On-call]                          ││ • Monitor for issues [SRE Team]                             ││ • Scan logs for exploitation [Security Team]                ││ • Notify stakeholders [Security Lead + CEO]                 ││                                                              ││ Day 2-7:                                                     ││ • Full codebase remediation [Dev Team]                      ││ • SAST tool setup [DevOps + Security]                       ││ • Security review [External Auditor]                        ││                                                              ││ Week 2-4:                                                    ││ • Security training program [Security + HR]                 ││ • Process improvements [Engineering Leadership]             ││                                                              ││ Dependencies: External auditor availability (Week 2)         │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐│ 7. FOLLOW-UP                                                 │├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤│ Success Metrics:                                             ││ • Zero SQL injection vulnerabilities (verified by scan)     ││ • 100% of PRs pass SAST checks                              ││ • 100% developer security training completion               ││ • No unauthorized access detected in log analysis           ││                                                              ││ Verification:                                                ││ • Day 1: Verify patch deployed, vulnerability closed        ││ • Week 1: External security audit confirms fixes            ││ • Week 2: SAST tool catching similar issues                 ││ • Month 1: Training completion, process adoption            ││                                                              ││ Prevention:                                                  ││ • SAST tools block vulnerable code in CI                    ││ • Security review required for data access code             ││ • Quarterly penetration testing                             ││ • Annual security training refresh                          ││                                                              ││ Incident Report:                                             ││ • Post-mortem meeting: Nov 16                               ││ • Document lessons learned                                  ││ • Share with engineering org                                │└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Notes

  • A3 forces concise, complete thinking (fits on one page)
  • Use data and facts, not opinions or blame
  • Root cause analysis is critical—use /why or /cause-and-effect
  • Countermeasures must address root causes, not symptoms
  • Implementation plan needs clear ownership and timelines
  • Follow-up ensures sustainable improvement
  • A3 becomes historical record for organizational learning
  • Update A3 as situation evolves (living document until closed)
  • Consider A3 for: incidents, recurring issues, major improvements
  • Overkill for: small bugs, one-line fixes, trivial issues

Source and attribution

Source:NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kitinskills/analyse-problemat commit23e2428

License: No license

Content belongs to its original authors. SourceWeft indexes it from a public repository.

Report or request removal