/authoring-log-alerts
Author useful, low-noise log alerts on services in a PostHog project. Use when the user asks to set up alerts for their logs, suggest alerts they should add, or evaluate whether a service is worth monitoring. Covers service triage, baseline characterisation, threshold drafting,
$ npx -y skills add posthog/posthog --skill authoring-log-alerts --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/authoring-log-alerts
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Author useful, low-noise log alerts on services in a PostHog project. Use when the user asks to set up alerts for their logs, suggest alerts they should add, or evaluate whether a service is worth monitoring. Covers service triage, baseline characterisation, threshold drafting,
SKILL.md
authoring-log-alerts.SKILL.mdname: authoring-log-alerts
description: >
Author useful, low-noise log alerts on services in a PostHog project. Use when the user asks to set up
alerts for their logs, suggest alerts they should add, or evaluate whether a service is worth monitoring.
Covers service triage, baseline characterisation, threshold drafting, back-testing via simulate, and
shipping with a notification destination.
Authoring log alerts
Authoring an alert is a _measurement_ problem, not a guessing problem. You are not trying to be exhaustive — you are trying to land thresholds that fire 0–3 times per week on real production patterns, on services that matter.
When to use this skill
- The user asks to "set up alerts" / "suggest alerts" for their project.
- The user wants to evaluate whether a service is producing alertable signal.
- The user has just enabled log alerting and wants a starter set.
When _not_ to use this skill
- Tuning an alert that already exists — that's a different job (use `posthog:logs-alerts-events-list` to inspect
fire/resolve cadence and `posthog:logs-alerts-partial-update` to adjust).
- Investigating an active incident — pull rows with `posthog:query-logs`, don't author an alert mid-incident.
Tools
| Tool | Job | Where it fits | | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ | | `posthog:logs-services` | Top-25 services in window with log_count, error_count, error_rate, sparkline. | Step 1 — triage. | | `posthog:logs-attributes-list` / `posthog:logs-attribute-values-list` | Discover keys/values for narrower filters. | Step 2, optional. | | `posthog:logs-count-ranges` | Adaptive time-bucketed counts for a filter. | Step 3 — baseline. | | `posthog:logs-alerts-simulate-create` | Replay a draft config against `-7d` history with full state machine. | Step 4 — validate. | | `posthog:logs-alerts-create` | Persist the alert. | Step 5 — ship. | | `posthog:logs-alerts-destinations-create` | Wire the alert to Slack, webhook, or Microsoft Teams. | Step 5: ship. |
Do **not** call `posthog:query-logs` during authoring. You need distributions, not rows. Reserve `posthog:query-logs` for the very end if the user asks "show me a sample of what would have fired" — `limit: 10` is plenty.
Workflow
1. Triage — pick candidate services
Call `posthog:logs-services` for the last 24h with no filters. The response is capped at 25 services and includes a sparkline, so it is small and bounded.
A service is a candidate when **both** are true:
- `log_count` is non-trivial (≥ ~1k in 24h — quieter services produce too little signal to alert on).
- `error_rate` is non-zero, **or** the user has named the service explicitly.
Skip services with high volume but `error_rate == 0` unless the user wants a volume-shape alert (e.g. "warn me if api-gateway suddenly stops producing logs"). Volume-floor alerts use `threshold_operator: below` and need different reasoning — see [references/volume-floor-alerts.md](./references/volume-floor-alerts.md).
If the user names a service, treat it as a candidate even without error signal.
2. (Optional) Narrow the filter
If a service has many error sub-types, an alert on "all errors" is usually too broad. Use `posthog:logs-attributes-list` (try `attribute_type: log`) and `posthog:logs-attribute-values-list` to find a discriminator — common ones are `http.status_code`, `error.type`, `k8s.container.name`. Add the narrowing filter to your draft.
Keep it simple: one severity filter + one or two attribute filters is plenty. Multi-clause filters are harder to reason about and rarely improve precision.
3. Baseline — characterise the candidate over 7 days
Call `posthog:logs-count-ranges` with the candidate's filters, `dateRange: { date_from: "-7d" }`, and `targetBuckets: 24` (one bucket ≈ 7h). The response gives you bucket counts.
**Do not eyeball the percentiles or scale the threshold to the alert window manually.** Pipe the count-ranges response into the helper script:
echo '<count-ranges JSON>' | python3 scripts/baseline_stats.py --window-minutes 5
The script returns:
{
"n_buckets": 12,
"bucket_minutes": 420.0,
"alert_window_minutes": 5,
"stats": { "p50": 12.0, "p95": 71.25, "p99": 126.25, "max": 140 },
"suggested_threshold_count": 5,
"rationale": "max(p99=126.25, median*3=36.0, floor=5) scaled from 420m bucket to 5m window",
"health": []
}Use `suggested_threshold_count` as your starting threshold. Read `health`:
| `health` flag | What it means | What to do | | ----------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | `sparse:N_of_M_buckets` | Too few non-empty buckets for a 7d baseline. | Widen filter, extend to `-30d`, or skip. | | `empty` | All buckets are zero. | Skip — no signal. | | `spiky` | `max` is 10×+ `p95`. | Count-threshold alerts work well. Proceed.
Read more
name: authoring-log-alerts description: > Author useful, low-noise log alerts on services in a PostHog project. Use when the user asks to set up alerts for their logs, suggest alerts they should add, or evaluate whether a service is worth monitoring. Covers service triage, baseline characterisation, threshold drafting, back-testing via simulate, and shipping with a notification destination.
Authoring log alerts
Authoring an alert is a _measurement_ problem, not a guessing problem. You are not trying to be exhaustive — you are trying to land thresholds that fire 0–3 times per week on real production patterns, on services that matter.
When to use this skill
- The user asks to "set up alerts" / "suggest alerts" for their project.
- The user wants to evaluate whether a service is producing alertable signal.
- The user has just enabled log alerting and wants a starter set.
When _not_ to use this skill
- Tuning an alert that already exists — that's a different job (use `posthog:logs-alerts-events-list` to inspect
fire/resolve cadence and `posthog:logs-alerts-partial-update` to adjust).
- Investigating an active incident — pull rows with `posthog:query-logs`, don't author an alert mid-incident.
Tools
| Tool | Job | Where it fits | | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ | | `posthog:logs-services` | Top-25 services in window with log_count, error_count, error_rate, sparkline. | Step 1 — triage. | | `posthog:logs-attributes-list` / `posthog:logs-attribute-values-list` | Discover keys/values for narrower filters. | Step 2, optional. | | `posthog:logs-count-ranges` | Adaptive time-bucketed counts for a filter. | Step 3 — baseline. | | `posthog:logs-alerts-simulate-create` | Replay a draft config against `-7d` history with full state machine. | Step 4 — validate. | | `posthog:logs-alerts-create` | Persist the alert. | Step 5 — ship. | | `posthog:logs-alerts-destinations-create` | Wire the alert to Slack, webhook, or Microsoft Teams. | Step 5: ship. |
Do **not** call `posthog:query-logs` during authoring. You need distributions, not rows. Reserve `posthog:query-logs` for the very end if the user asks "show me a sample of what would have fired" — `limit: 10` is plenty.
Workflow
1. Triage — pick candidate services
Call `posthog:logs-services` for the last 24h with no filters. The response is capped at 25 services and includes a sparkline, so it is small and bounded.
A service is a candidate when **both** are true:
- `log_count` is non-trivial (≥ ~1k in 24h — quieter services produce too little signal to alert on).
- `error_rate` is non-zero, **or** the user has named the service explicitly.
Skip services with high volume but `error_rate == 0` unless the user wants a volume-shape alert (e.g. "warn me if api-gateway suddenly stops producing logs"). Volume-floor alerts use `threshold_operator: below` and need different reasoning — see [references/volume-floor-alerts.md](./references/volume-floor-alerts.md).
If the user names a service, treat it as a candidate even without error signal.
2. (Optional) Narrow the filter
If a service has many error sub-types, an alert on "all errors" is usually too broad. Use `posthog:logs-attributes-list` (try `attribute_type: log`) and `posthog:logs-attribute-values-list` to find a discriminator — common ones are `http.status_code`, `error.type`, `k8s.container.name`. Add the narrowing filter to your draft.
Keep it simple: one severity filter + one or two attribute filters is plenty. Multi-clause filters are harder to reason about and rarely improve precision.
3. Baseline — characterise the candidate over 7 days
Call `posthog:logs-count-ranges` with the candidate's filters, `dateRange: { date_from: "-7d" }`, and `targetBuckets: 24` (one bucket ≈ 7h). The response gives you bucket counts.
**Do not eyeball the percentiles or scale the threshold to the alert window manually.** Pipe the count-ranges response into the helper script:
echo '<count-ranges JSON>' | python3 scripts/baseline_stats.py --window-minutes 5
The script returns:
{
"n_buckets": 12,
"bucket_minutes": 420.0,
"alert_window_minutes": 5,
"stats": { "p50": 12.0, "p95": 71.25, "p99": 126.25, "max": 140 },
"suggested_threshold_count": 5,
"rationale": "max(p99=126.25, median*3=36.0, floor=5) scaled from 420m bucket to 5m window",
"health": []
}Use `suggested_threshold_count` as your starting threshold. Read `health`:
| `health` flag | What it means | What to do | | ----------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | `sparse:N_of_M_buckets` | Too few non-empty buckets for a 7d baseline. | Widen filter, extend to `-30d`, or skip. | | `empty` | All buckets are zero. | Skip — no signal. | | `spiky` | `max` is 10×+ `p95`. | Count-threshold alerts work well. Proceed.
:hedgehog: PostHog is the leading platform for building self-driving products. Our developer tools – AI observability, analytics, session replay, flags, experiments, error tracking, logs, and more – capture all the context agents need to diagnose problems, uncover opportunities, and ship fixes. Steer it all from Slack, web, desktop, or the MCP.
Repo: posthog/posthog
Other skills on posthog.
- /analyzing-expensive-users
Analyze the most expensive users in AI observability and explain why they cost so much. Use when the user asks about top spenders, expensive users, per-user LLM cost, user-level cost drivers, or patterns behind high AI observability spend.
Open skill - /creating-online-evaluations
Author continuously-running online evaluations in PostHog AI observability, grounded in real failure modes you've identified. Use when the user wants evaluations that automatically score new generations or whole traces going forward — "create an eval to catch X", "continuously
Open skill - /exploring-ai-failures
Find where an AI/LLM application is failing in production and surface the failure patterns, working from real traces. Use when someone wants to understand what's going wrong with an AI feature, find and categorize failure modes, triage errors, or investigate quality issues
Open skill - /exploring-llm-clusters
Investigate AI observability clusters — understand usage patterns in AI/LLM traffic, compare cluster behavior, compute cost/latency metrics, and drill into individual traces within clusters.
Open skill - /exploring-llm-costs
Investigate LLM spend in PostHog — total cost over time, cost by model, provider, user, trace, or custom dimension, token and cache-hit economics, and cost regressions. Use when the user asks "how much are we spending on LLMs?", "which model / user / feature is most expensive?",
Open skill - /exploring-llm-evaluations
Investigate AI observability evaluations — `hog` (deterministic code-based), `llm_judge` (LLM-prompt-based), and `sentiment` (user-message sentiment). Find existing evaluations, inspect their configuration, run them against specific generations, query individual results, and
Open skill

