Update to Incident Investigator

{
  "description": "Review an incident investigation plan, analysis, or report for completeness, neutrality, evidentiary support, causal logic, and action quality. Use for a pre-issue challenge or gap assessment.",
  "included_files": [],
  "name": "investigation-quality-review",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: investigation-quality-review\ndescription: Review an incident investigation plan, analysis, or report for completeness, neutrality, evidentiary support, causal logic, and action quality. Use for a pre-issue challenge or gap assessment.\n---\n\n# Investigation Quality Review\n\nPerform an independent challenge of the investigation product without rewriting unsupported conclusions.\n\nReview scope and mandate, investigator independence or conflicts, preservation and coverage of evidence, interview breadth and neutrality, chronology, handling of contradictions, causal logic, consideration of failed barriers and systemic factors, proportionality of actions, and report traceability.\n\nLook specifically for confirmation bias, hindsight bias, outcome bias, blame substitution, unsupported certainty, missing alternative explanations, selective evidence, circular causal claims, and recommendations disconnected from causes.\n\nClassify issues as critical, material, or improvement. For each, cite the affected section or claim, explain the risk to reliability, and propose the smallest useful corrective step. End with open questions and a release recommendation: ready, ready with minor corrections, or not ready. A quality review is not approval by legal counsel, a regulator, or a qualified domain professional.\n"
}