Agent skill

Synthetic Monitoring

by petrkindlmann in petrkindlmann/qa-skills

Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release. An agent skill from petrkindlmann/qa-skills.

MITAuto-check passedDevOps & Cloud

Install Synthetic Monitoring

skills CLI
$ npx skills add petrkindlmann/qa-skills --skill synthetic-monitoring -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install petrkindlmann/qa-skills synthetic-monitoring --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/petrkindlmann/qa-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/synthetic-monitoring .claude/skills/synthetic-monitoring && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
synthetic-monitoring
GitHub stars
170
Token cost
~5.8k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,506 words
Files
3 (incl. references)
Skills in repo
45
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release. An agent skill from petrkindlmann/qa-skills.

  • Works in 5 steps: Synthetic tests validate the user… → Keep probes simple and fast → Alert on trends, not single failures → …
  • : synthetic monitoring
  • SKILL.md covers Quick Route, Discovery Questions, Core Principles and Probe Design, plus 9 more sections
  • Calls npx

What it does

Synthetic Monitoring is an agent skill from petrkindlmann/qa-skills. Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release. Covers probe design for critical user journeys, alerting integration, SLA validation, multi-region monitoring, and the boundary between QA and SRE. Use when: "synthetic monitoring," "uptime testing," "scheduled probes," "SLA validation," "availability monitoring," "post-deploy checks." Not for: safe-release techniques during rollout — use testing-in-production. Not for: designing tests from prod telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Not for: a one-shot…

Its SKILL.md is about 5.8k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 3 other files, including reference files (for example `references/platforms-and-ci.md` and `references/probe-implementations.md`).

It sits in DevOps & Cloud, covering Monitoring and alerting, Feature launches and release readiness and Site reliability engineering. The repository describes itself as: 50 QA and test-automation skills for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and any Agent Skills Standard runtime. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • : synthetic monitoring
  • Scheduled probes
  • Availability monitoring
  • Post-deploy checks. Not for: safe-release techniques during rollout — use testing-in-production

Example prompts

  • “synthetic monitoring,”
  • “uptime testing,”
  • “scheduled probes,”
  • “/synthetic-monitoring”

Requirements

  • Python 3

Workflow steps

5 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Synthetic tests validate the user experience continuously
  2. Keep probes simple and fast
  3. Alert on trends, not single failures
  4. Probes must not affect production data
  5. Assert on the goal, not the status code

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit b3bb61b. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    Shell commands in SKILL.md call:

    • npx

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    Links to these hosts (documentation or services it may open):

    • sre.google
    • openslo.com

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Synthetic Monitoring loads about 5.8k tokens when it runs, and up to ~8k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 172 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,506 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~172
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~5.8k
With references · SKILL.md plus every file in references/, read only if the agent opens them
~8k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from petrkindlmann/qa-skills at commit b3bb61b, republished under its MIT licence (© petrkindlmann). 2,506 words, ~5,762 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/synthetic-monitoring/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 2 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
synthetic-monitoring
description
Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release. Covers probe design for critical user journeys, alerting integration, SLA validation, multi-region monitoring, and the boundary between QA and SRE. Use when: "synthetic monitoring," "uptime testing," "scheduled probes," "SLA validation," "availability monitoring," "post-deploy checks." Not for: safe-release techniques during rollout — use testing-in-production. Not for: designing tests from prod telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Not for: a one-shot post-deploy smoke gate tied to a release — use release-readiness. Related: testing-in-production, release-readiness, performance-testing, qa-metrics.
license
MIT
metadata.author
kindlmann
metadata.version
2.0
metadata.category
production
<objective>
Synthetic monitoring runs scripted tests against production on a schedule, 24/7. It catches outages, performance degradation, and broken flows before real users report them — at 3 AM when traffic is zero, probes are the only thing checking your app works. A login page that always returns 200 but never authenticates passes a naive uptime check; a synthetic probe that asserts the dashboard loads catches it. This skill covers probe design, alerting integration, SLA validation, multi-region execution, and the runbook discipline that keeps a 3 AM page actionable.
</objective>

Quick Route

SituationGo to
Picking a platform (Checkly, Datadog, Grafana, CloudWatch…)Platform Options
Writing a probe (login, API health, search)Probe Design → references/probe-implementations.md
Probe runs but users still report outagesFailure Modes
Alerts too noisy or missing real outagesAlerting Integration
Calculating downtime budget for an SLASLA Validation
Probe failed at 3 AM and on-call is lostrunbook template in references/platforms-and-ci.md

Discovery Questions

Check .agents/qa-project-context.md first. If it exists, use it as context and skip questions already answered there. Each answer changes the probe set, the alerting config, or the SLA math.

Critical flows (decides which probes you write):

  • What are the 5-10 most important user journeys (login, search, checkout, signup, core workflow)? These become your probe list.
  • Which flows, if broken, cause immediate revenue loss or churn? These get the shortest frequency and page on-call.
  • Are there flows that break silently (data sync, background jobs, webhooks)? Silent failures need probes most — no user reports them.
  • Do you have documented SLAs/SLOs for availability and response time? They set the downtime budget and the alert thresholds.

Current monitoring (decides where the gaps are):

  • What exists today (uptime checks, APM, error tracking, dashboards)? Avoid duplicating; find the gap.
  • Are there gaps between what monitoring covers and what users experience? That gap is where probes earn their keep.
  • How do you learn about production issues today (alerts, user reports, social media)? If it's user reports, detection time is your first metric to fix.
  • What was the last outage, and how long before it was detected? Sets the detection-time target probes must beat.

Infrastructure (decides regions and CDN assertions):

  • Is the app served from multiple regions or one? Multi-region serving needs multi-region probing.
  • Are there CDN, caching, or edge layers that could mask origin failures? If yes, probes must assert on x-cache/origin headers.
  • Do third-party dependencies (payment, auth, email) have their own monitoring? Their status pages feed your runbooks.
  • What alerting systems exist (PagerDuty, OpsGenie, Slack, email)? Decides the routing config.

Test accounts (decides data safety):

  • Do dedicated synthetic test accounts exist in production? Without them, probes pollute real data and analytics.
  • Can test accounts be excluded from analytics, billing, and email campaigns? If not, probe traffic skews every downstream number.
  • Is there API access for programmatic account setup and data cleanup? Decides whether create-then-delete probes are viable.

Core Principles

1. Synthetic tests validate the user experience continuously

RUM tells you what happened; synthetic tells you what is happening right now, whether or not real users are active. At 3 AM when traffic is zero, synthetic probes are the only thing checking the app works. Complement RUM, never replace it: synthetic covers known paths with predictable inputs, RUM discovers the creative ways real users break things.

2. Keep probes simple and fast

A probe that takes 2 minutes and touches 15 pages is not a probe — it is an E2E suite running in production. Probes are short (per-probe wall-clock budget under 30 seconds), focused (one critical path each), and stable (retries: 0, zero flakiness tolerance). The 30-second ceiling is a hard budget: a slow probe that "still passes" is masking a degradation users feel.

A single probe failure is noise — network blips and DNS hiccups cause them constantly. Two consecutive failures are a signal; failures from 2+ regions confirm it is not local. Configure consecutive-failure and multi-region thresholds, or alert fatigue teaches the team to ignore the pager.

4. Probes must not affect production data

Probes run every few minutes, 24/7. Even small side effects (a created record, an incremented counter) compound. Probes must be non-destructive, created data cleaned up immediately, and synthetic traffic excluded from analytics, billing, and — critically — from SLO/error-budget math itself, or probes inflate your own reliability numbers.

5. Assert on the goal, not the status code

A login page that returns 200 but never authenticates is broken. A search page that returns 200 with zero results is broken. Probes assert that the user can accomplish their goal — data loads, auth succeeds, results appear — not merely that the page returns a 2xx.


Probe Design

Design probes around critical user journeys, not infrastructure components. Users do not care if your load balancer is healthy — they care if they can log in and use the product.

ProbeWhat It ValidatesFrequencyTimeout
Homepage loadDNS, CDN, server, basic rendering1 min10s
Login flowAuthentication service, session management5 min15s
Core workflowPrimary value-delivering action (create document, run report)5 min20s
API healthBackend services, database connectivity1 min5s
SearchSearch index, query processing, result rendering5 min15s
Checkout (if applicable)Payment integration (sandbox mode), cart, order creation10 min25s
Third-party integrationsOAuth providers, email delivery, file storage10 min15s
Probe implementations

Three probe shapes cover most needs: a login flow (Playwright browser), an API health check (status + auth + latency budget), and a search probe (fill query → submit → assert on results, not just status). Keep each to one critical path, a tight timeout, and retries: 0. See references/probe-implementations.md for runnable login-flow, API-health, and search probes plus the environment-aware config.

Non-destructive probe patterns
Safe patterns:
  - Read-only operations: GET requests, page loads, searches
  - Sandbox transactions: payment in test mode, email to internal addresses
  - Create-then-delete: create a draft, verify, delete immediately
  - Synthetic flag: operations tagged as synthetic, excluded from processing

Dangerous patterns (avoid):
  - Creating real orders, tickets, or user-facing records
  - Triggering real notifications (email, SMS, push)
  - Modifying shared resources (config, permissions, settings)
  - Operations that cannot be automatically cleaned up
Dedicated test accounts
Account requirements:
  - Clearly identifiable: email contains "synthetic" or "monitor"
  - Flagged in database with an is_synthetic flag (is_synthetic = true)
  - Excluded from analytics, billing, email campaigns, support queues
  - Excluded from RUM and SLO/error-budget pipelines (synthetic traffic is not real traffic)
  - Pre-populated with stable test data that probes can rely on
  - Credentials in a secrets manager (process.env), rotated quarterly
  - Separate accounts per concurrent probe (avoid state conflicts)

Platform Options

PlatformStrengthsWhen to Use
ChecklyPlaywright-native, code-first, Git integration; Rocky AI agent (GA 2026) now does automated root-cause analysis across Playwright/API/Multistep/TCP/DNS/ICMP checks; CLI access from any AI agent; MCP serverTeams already using Playwright for E2E
Datadog SyntheticDeep APM integration, browser and API testsTeams on the Datadog platform
Grafana Synthetic MonitoringOpen source, integrates with Grafana dashboards; pairs with k6 2.x; pin a version channel (v1.x/v2.x) for reproducibilityTeams using the Grafana stack
AWS CloudWatch SyntheticsBlueprints (heartbeat, API, broken-link, visual diff); Python or Node Puppeteer canariesTeams already on AWS
New Relic SyntheticsFull-stack observability integrationTeams on the New Relic platform
Better StackLightweight uptime + status pages + on-callSMB-friendly, fast setup
Uptime KumaOSS, self-hosted, lightweightSelf-hosting requirement, small surface area
Custom (Playwright / k6 / Puppeteer + cron)Full control, no vendor lock-inBudget-constrained or custom requirements

Probes can be authored in Playwright (TS/JS), Puppeteer, k6 (JS — k6 2.0 shipped May 2026 with AI-assisted test authoring and a clearer Assertions API; first-class for synthetic), or Python (CloudWatch Synthetics, Checkly). Pick what your team already maintains. Avoid: Pingdom for new setups — it is a legacy uptime tool; prefer code-first alternatives (Checkly, Grafana, custom Playwright) that version-control probes alongside your app.

Custom and managed implementations

Self-managed: schedule Playwright probes with a GitHub Actions schedule cron (every 5 minutes), inject prod credentials via secrets, and report results to a monitoring webhook. Managed: Checkly is Playwright-native and runs from multiple locations on a fixed frequency. Either way, make probes environment-aware so the same code runs against staging and production with different base URLs and thresholds. See references/platforms-and-ci.md for the GitHub Actions workflow, the Checkly config, the alert-routing rules, and the runbook template.


Alerting Integration

Not every probe failure is an incident. Configure rules that cut noise while catching real problems.

Alerting rules:
  - Single failure: log, do not alert (transient network issue)
  - 2 consecutive failures from same region: warning (possible issue)
  - 2 consecutive failures from 2+ regions: alert on-call (confirmed outage)
  - Latency >2x baseline for 10 minutes: warning (performance degradation)
  - Latency >3x baseline for 5 minutes: alert on-call (severe degradation)
  - Any probe timeout: alert if 3 consecutive (service unresponsive)

Routing. Critical failures on revenue paths (login, checkout, api-health) page on-call (PagerDuty + Slack incidents) with a short repeat interval; warnings on secondary probes go to a Slack monitoring channel; info-level events use a long repeat interval. The probe must tag each result with a severity and probe label for these routes to match — see the routing note in references/platforms-and-ci.md for the full alerting-rules.yaml and the tagging step.

Suppress synthetic alerts during planned maintenance. A maintenance window should silence synthetic paging (the probes will fail by design) and exclude that window from error-budget math, or scheduled work burns budget and pages on-call for nothing.

Alert message format — include enough context to start investigating immediately:

Alert template:
  Title: [SYNTHETIC] {probe_name} failing from {region}
  Severity: {critical|warning|info}
  Consecutive failures: {count}
  Last success: {timestamp}
  Error: {error_message}
  Duration: {last_response_time_ms}ms (threshold: {threshold}ms)
  Dashboard: {link_to_dashboard}
  Runbook: {link_to_runbook}
  Regions affected: {list_of_failing_regions}

The {link_to_runbook} points at a per-probe runbook (six lines: what it tests, first checks, manual repro, escalation, dashboard, owner). See the template in references/platforms-and-ci.md.


SLA Validation

Availability calculation
Availability = (total_minutes - downtime_minutes) / total_minutes × 100

Where:
  - total_minutes = calendar month in minutes (43,200 for a 30-day month)
  - downtime_minutes = minutes where synthetic probes detected failure

SLA tiers (downtime/month, monthly basis on 43,200 min):
  99.0%  = 432 min   = 7h 12min     (basic web app)
  99.9%  = 43.2 min  = 43min 12s    (business application)
  99.95% = 21.6 min  = 21min 36s    (critical SaaS)
  99.99% = 4.32 min  = 4min 19s     (infrastructure/platform)

These are common availability targets, not prescriptive tiers. Pick targets from a user-impact analysis, not by tier name. Modern practice (Google SRE Workbook, OpenSLO) favors explicit SLO + error-budget policies over labelled tiers — define what user-visible failure looks like, set the budget user impact tolerates, and let the SLO follow. References: https://sre.google/workbook/ ; https://openslo.com/

Response time percentiles

Track percentiles, not averages — averages hide the worst experiences.

SLA response time targets (example):
  Homepage load:  P50 < 1s,    P95 < 3s,   P99 < 5s
  API response:   P50 < 200ms, P95 < 500ms, P99 < 1s
  Search results: P50 < 500ms, P95 < 2s,   P99 < 4s
  Login flow:     P50 < 2s,    P95 < 5s,   P99 < 8s
Error budget tracking

Error budget connects SLA targets to engineering decisions.

Error budget calculation:
  SLO: 99.9% availability on a 43,200-min month
  Budget: 0.1% of total time = 43.2 minutes/month

  Budget consumed this month: 12 minutes (28%)
  Budget remaining: 31.2 minutes (72%)

Actions by budget status:
  >50% remaining: normal operations, ship features
  25-50% remaining: caution, review recent changes
  <25% remaining: freeze non-critical deploys, focus on reliability
  Budget exhausted: incident mode, every deploy needs extra scrutiny

Exclude synthetic-probe downtime caused by your own maintenance windows from this calculation, or planned work shows as budget burn.


Show full SKILL.md (1,024 more words)Show less

Multi-Region Monitoring

Run probes from regions where your users are. A service that works from us-east-1 but is broken from ap-southeast-1 is broken for APAC users.

Region selection strategy:
  - Minimum 3 regions for global services
  - Always include: closest to primary infrastructure, largest user base, farthest from primary
  - Example for US-primary service: us-east-1, eu-west-1, ap-southeast-1
  - Example for EU-primary service: eu-west-1, us-east-1, ap-northeast-1

Track regional latency separately — a global average hides regional degradation.

Regional latency dashboard:
  Region       | P50    | P95    | Status
  us-east-1    | 120ms  | 340ms  | healthy
  eu-west-1    | 280ms  | 620ms  | healthy
  ap-southeast | 450ms  | 1200ms | warning (P95 above threshold)

Alert when:
  - Any region's P95 exceeds its regional threshold
  - Latency difference between regions exceeds 5x (CDN or routing issue)
  - A region that was healthy becomes consistently degraded

CDN validation. Synthetic probes verify CDN caching by checking response headers (x-cache, cf-cache-status) for HIT and confirming the server header matches the expected provider. This catches CDN misconfigurations — and origin failures masked by a stale cache — before users hit slow uncached responses.


Anti-Patterns

Complex probes that break often

A probe that navigates 10 pages, fills 5 forms, and asserts on 20 elements is an E2E test, not a synthetic probe. When it breaks, you cannot tell if the app is down or the probe is flaky. Fix: one critical path per probe, under 30 seconds, under 5 assertions. A failure should make it immediately clear what is broken.

Alerting on every single failure

Network blips, DNS hiccups, and transient cloud issues cause occasional failures. Alerting on every one produces noise that teaches the team to ignore alerts. Fix: require 2-3 consecutive failures and failures from 2+ regions before paging. Escalating severity: first failure logs, second warns, third pages.

No test account isolation

Probes sharing one account interfere — one probe changes a setting, another fails because it expected the default. Fix: one dedicated synthetic account per concurrent probe, flagged synthetic, excluded from analytics and billing.

Monitoring only the happy path

Probes that only check "page loads, returns 200" miss broken functionality behind a loading page. A login that returns 200 but never authenticates is not working. Fix: assert on meaningful content — data loads, auth succeeds, the core action completes, search returns results. One "can the user accomplish their goal" probe is worth ten "does the page return 200" probes.

No runbook for probe failures

An alert fires at 3 AM. On-call sees "Login probe failing" but has no idea what to check first, what the probe does, or how to tell a real outage from a probe issue. Fix: every probe links a runbook (what it tests; first checks — third-party status, recent deploys, app telemetry; manual repro; escalation; dashboard link). See the template in references/platforms-and-ci.md.

Emerging pattern (2026): agent-driven first response. Tools like Checkly Rocky (GA 2026, automated root-cause analysis across check types) and Honeycomb Canvas Skills (Agent Observability, launched May 2026; open-source honeycombio/agent-skill repo ships a honeycomb-investigator and instrumentation-advisor for Claude Code and Cursor) read probe context + linked runbook + telemetry and post a candidate diagnosis to chat. Treat this as triage assist — it shortens MTTR for routine failures, but it does not replace on-call judgment for novel incidents.


Failure Modes

SymptomLikely causeFix or check
Probe green but users report an outageProbe asserts only HTTP 200, not the goalAdd content/state assertions (dashboard heading, search results count, body.status)
Flapping alerts (fire/resolve repeatedly)No consecutive-failure or multi-region ruleRequire 2+ consecutive failures and 2+ regions before paging
Probe passes locally, fails in CI/regionRegion-specific outage or CDN routingCompare per-region results; check latency-difference and x-cache assertions
Probe failures with no real outageSynthetic-account state drift (shared account)One isolated account per concurrent probe; reset/seed stable data
Origin is down but probe stays greenCDN serving stale cacheAssert cf-cache-status/origin server header, not just 200
Error budget burns with no incidentMaintenance windows counted as downtimeSuppress synthetic paging during maintenance; exclude window from budget math
On-call paged but can't actMissing/empty runbook on the alertPopulate the six-line runbook; verify {link_to_runbook} resolves
Reliability numbers look too goodSynthetic traffic counted as real in SLO/RUMExclude is_synthetic traffic from RUM, billing, and error-budget pipelines

Verification

Prove the monitoring works before trusting it — smallest check first.

  1. Probes pass against staging. Run npx playwright test probes/ --reporter=list against staging and confirm every probe passes within its declared timeout (no probe exceeds the 30s ceiling).
  2. A failure actually pages. Point one probe at a known-bad URL (a 503 or a wrong path), let it run the configured consecutive-failure count, and confirm the alert routes to on-call within the SLA detection time — and resolves when you revert.
  3. Assertions are meaningful, not status-only. Temporarily break the asserted content (rename the dashboard heading on staging) and confirm the probe fails. A probe that stays green here is asserting on the wrong thing.
  4. Synthetic traffic is excluded. Query the analytics/RUM/billing pipeline for is_synthetic traffic and confirm it is filtered out.

Done When

  • A probe exists for every critical user journey identified in discovery (not only homepage uptime or a single health endpoint), and each asserts on the goal, not just a 2xx.
  • Each probe's wall-clock budget is under 30s, with retries: 0.
  • Alerting config encodes a ≥2 consecutive-failure rule AND a multi-region confirmation rule, and probe results are tagged with severity + probe so routes match.
  • The SLA dashboard shows current availability and error-budget consumption, and synthetic traffic is excluded from RUM, billing, and error-budget pipelines.
  • A test alert (probe pointed at a failing URL) reaches on-call within the SLA detection time — confirmed once, not assumed.
  • Every probe links a non-empty runbook with first checks, manual repro, and an escalation path.
  • A scheduled review job or recurring calendar item for monitoring health exists (not just an intention to review).

Reference Files (in references/)

  • probe-implementations.md — Runnable login-flow, API-health, and search probes, plus the environment-aware probe config.
  • platforms-and-ci.md — GitHub Actions scheduling workflow, Checkly config, alert-routing rules + tagging note, and the per-probe runbook template.
  • testing-in-production — safe-release techniques (flags, canary, guardrail metrics) applied during a rollout; synthetic monitoring is the schedule-driven validation that runs continuously after.
  • release-readiness — a one-shot post-deploy smoke gate tied to a specific release lives there; come here for the continuous, schedule-driven version that keeps running long after the release.
  • observability-driven-testing — uses production telemetry (including signals from these probes) as input to design new tests; this skill instead produces the probes and their telemetry.
  • performance-testing — load tests measure capacity on demand; synthetic probes track production performance trends between those load tests.
  • qa-metrics — availability, response-time percentiles, and error-budget consumption from probes feed the quality dashboards defined there.
  • ci-cd-integration — go there to wire synthetic probes into a pipeline as a post-deploy verification stage.

© petrkindlmann, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 2 other files (references) in skills/synthetic-monitoring of petrkindlmann/qa-skills.

  • SKILL.md
  • references/platforms-and-ci.md
  • references/probe-implementations.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit b3bb61b

Compare with similar skills

Synthetic Monitoring next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Synthetic Monitoring compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Synthetic Monitoring this skillpetrkindlmann/qa-skills170—~5.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Service Mesh Observabilitywshobson/agents40k9 repos~607Automated safety check: PassMIT
Monitoring Observabilityahmedasmar/devops-claude-skills203—~3.9kAutomated safety check: PassNone
Prometheus Error Rate Investigatorprometheus/prometheus-mcp121—~592Automated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Monitoring ExpertJeffallan/claude-skills12k—~1.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Oma Observabilityfirst-fluke/oh-my-agent1.3k—~4.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Set up tracing, metrics and dashboards for Istio, Linkerd and other service meshes, with golden-signal alerts, SLOs and guidance on sampling and cardinality.

    40k GitHub starsUsed in 9 repos~607 tokens
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Monitoring Observability

    ahmedasmar/devops-claude-skills

    Monitoring and observability strategy, implementation, and troubleshooting.

    203 GitHub stars~3.9k tokensUpdated 6 mo ago
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Prometheus Error Rate Investigator

    prometheus/prometheus-mcp

    Quantifies elevated error rates with PromQL, compares them to a baseline, and isolates which jobs or instances an error spike is concentrated in.

    121 GitHub stars~592 tokensUpdated yesterday
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Monitoring Expert

    Jeffallan/claude-skills

    Sets up application monitoring: structured logs, Prometheus metrics, OpenTelemetry tracing, Grafana dashboards, alert rules and load tests with k6 or Artillery.

    12k GitHub stars~1.6k tokensUpdated 7 days ago
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Oma Observability

    first-fluke/oh-my-agent

    Intent-based observability + traceability router across layers, boundaries, and signals.

    1.3k GitHub stars~4.9k tokensUpdated yesterday
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Observability Sre Triage

    elastic/agent-skills

    Official

    Triage a degraded or suspect service end to end: read SLO status and burn rate, check active alerting rules and ML anomalies, measure throughput, latency, and error rate, assess dependency health…

    592 GitHub stars~7.4k tokensUpdated 3 days ago
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed

More from petrkindlmann/qa-skills

All 45 skills in this repo
  • Accessibility Testing

    petrkindlmann/qa-skills

    Test for WCAG 2.2 AA compliance with axe-core + Playwright, keyboard navigation audits, screen reader testing, ARIA pattern validation, and legal compliance mapping (ADA, EAA, Section 508).

    170 GitHub stars~4.5k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Agentic Browser Testing

    petrkindlmann/qa-skills

    Goal-driven E2E testing where a browser agent (Playwright MCP / computer-use) reads a natural-language goal and explores the app via the accessibility tree to assert outcomes — no pre-written script.

    170 GitHub stars~4.5k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • AI Test Generation

    petrkindlmann/qa-skills

    Use AI to write NEW test code from specs, PRDs, user stories, code diffs, bug reports, or OpenAPI specs.

    170 GitHub stars~4.8k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • API Testing

    petrkindlmann/qa-skills

    Test REST and GraphQL APIs with Playwright APIRequestContext, Supertest, or standalone HTTP clients.

    170 GitHub stars~2.7k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • CI CD Integration

    petrkindlmann/qa-skills

    Design CI/CD pipelines that run test suites. An agent skill from petrkindlmann/qa-skills.

    170 GitHub stars~4.8k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Compliance Testing

    petrkindlmann/qa-skills

    Test for regulatory compliance: GDPR/CMP consent verification, Google Consent Mode v2, Global Privacy Control (GPC), CCPA/US state opt-out, EU AI Act Article 50 transparency, Better Ads Standards…

    170 GitHub stars~4.6k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Synthetic Monitoring

What does Synthetic Monitoring do?

Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release. An agent skill from petrkindlmann/qa-skills. Synthetic Monitoring is an agent skill from petrkindlmann/qa-skills. Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release.

When should I use Synthetic Monitoring?

Synthetic Monitoring fits situations like: : synthetic monitoring; scheduled probes; availability monitoring; post-deploy checks. Not for: safe-release techniques during rollout — use testing-in-production.

How do I install Synthetic Monitoring in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add petrkindlmann/qa-skills --skill synthetic-monitoring -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/synthetic-monitoring in petrkindlmann/qa-skills) into .claude/skills/synthetic-monitoring in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Synthetic Monitoring in Codex?

Run `npx skills add petrkindlmann/qa-skills --skill synthetic-monitoring -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/synthetic-monitoring in petrkindlmann/qa-skills) into .agents/skills/synthetic-monitoring in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Synthetic Monitoring in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add petrkindlmann/qa-skills --skill synthetic-monitoring -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/synthetic-monitoring, .gemini/skills/synthetic-monitoring, .github/skills/synthetic-monitoring and .opencode/skills/synthetic-monitoring in your project.

What does Synthetic Monitoring need to run?

Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Synthetic Monitoring needs the command-line tools its instructions call (npx). Our summary lists: Python 3.

Does Synthetic Monitoring access the network?

SKILL.md names 2 domains. As links in the text: sre.google and openslo.com. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Synthetic Monitoring safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Synthetic Monitoring use?

Synthetic Monitoring is published under the MIT licence (declared in SKILL.md). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Synthetic Monitoring use?

About 5.8k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 23k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 2.2k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.

What are the alternatives to Synthetic Monitoring?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Synthetic Monitoring: Service Mesh Observability (wshobson/agents, 40k stars), Monitoring Observability (ahmedasmar/devops-claude-skills, 203 stars), Prometheus Error Rate Investigator (prometheus/prometheus-mcp, 121 stars) and Monitoring Expert (Jeffallan/claude-skills, 12k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Synthetic Monitoring?

petrkindlmann (a GitHub user) maintains it in petrkindlmann/qa-skills, which has 170 GitHub stars. The repository holds 45 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on June 10, 2026.

Source: petrkindlmann/qa-skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.