hypercare — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited hypercare (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
This skill enforces a structured, measurable hypercare period — preventing premature exit from hypercare, untracked P1 downgrades, and BAU handover before the system has actually stabilized.
| Agent Will Try To... | Why It Seems Reasonable | Why It Fails | Counter |
|---|---|---|---|
| Declare hypercare exit because "it's been quiet" | "No major issues in the last week — the system is stable" | Quiet periods during hypercare can reflect low user adoption, incomplete business processes (month-end not yet run), or issues being worked around rather than resolved. Stabilization criteria exist precisely to prevent this misreading. | Iron Law 1: Stabilization criteria are checked line-by-line, not assessed by feel. |
| Downgrade a P1 to avoid SLA breach | "It's really more of a P2 — there is a workaround" | If the original classification was correct, downgrading under SLA pressure conceals a performance failure. The workaround may be consuming significant business effort not visible to IT. | Iron Law 2: Priority changes require business owner sign-off. Document the workaround effort cost. |
| Close an issue ticket without root cause | "The user confirmed the issue is fixed" | Without root cause, the fix is symptomatic. The same issue will recur in a different context (different user, month-end load, different plant). | Iron Law 4: Root cause field is mandatory for ticket closure. "Unknown" is not acceptable — it means investigation is incomplete. |
| Skip daily standup when issues are low | "It's a quiet day, we don't need the call" | The standup is not just issue review — it surfaces emerging patterns, batch job failures, and performance degradation before they escalate to P1. Skipping it creates blind spots. | Checklist Step 4: Daily standup is non-negotiable during hypercare, regardless of current issue volume. |
| Hand over to BAU before stabilization criteria are met | "The BAU team is capable, they can handle it from here" | BAU teams do not have project context, escalation relationships, or vendor access that the project team has. Premature handover without these transfers creates a support vacuum. | Iron Law 1 + Checklist Step 7: Knowledge transfer is a structured activity with completion evidence, not an assumption. |
| Treat all issues as equally urgent | "Every user complaint is a priority" | Without triage, P1 (system down) competes with P4 (cosmetic issue) for the same resource. SLA discipline collapses. Business-critical processes go unaddressed while cosmetic issues are fixed. | Checklist Step 3: Priority classification happens at first contact, using the defined P1-P4 matrix. |
Watch for these phrases in your own reasoning — each signals an Iron Law violation:
<HARD-GATE> Hypercare exit CANNOT be declared until:
If any condition is unmet, hypercare continues. Do not declare exit. Reassess against criteria after the next stabilization measurement period. </HARD-GATE>
PRIORITY | DEFINITION | RESPONSE SLA | RESOLUTION SLA | EXAMPLE
---------|------------------------------------------------|--------------|----------------|------------------------------------------
P1 | System unavailable OR critical process completely | 15 minutes | 4 hours | SAP login failure; payroll run aborted;
| blocked with no workaround | | | goods receipt completely blocked
P2 | Critical process impaired; workaround exists | 30 minutes | 8 hours | Invoice posting errors for one company
| but workaround is high-effort | | | code; purchase order approval stuck
P3 | Process degraded; workaround is low-effort | 2 hours | 3 business days| Output missing from print; report
| | | | slow but usable; one field not defaulting
P4 | Cosmetic, enhancement, or low-impact issue | Next standup | Next sprint | Label mismatch on screen; column order
| | | | preference; training requestHYPERCARE DAILY STATUS REPORT
Project: [Name] | Day [N] of Hypercare | Date: [Date] | Prepared by: [Name]
OVERALL STATUS: [ ] GREEN — Stable [ ] AMBER — Issues being managed [ ] RED — P1 active
ISSUE SUMMARY
-------------
Priority | Open | New Today | Closed Today | SLA Breaches Today
---------|------|-----------|--------------|-------------------
P1 | | | |
P2 | | | |
P3 | | | |
P4 | | | |
ACTIVE P1/P2 ISSUES
--------------------
ID | Description | Owner | Open Since | SLA Deadline | Status/Next Action
SYSTEM MONITORING SUMMARY (Today)
----------------------------------
SM37 Batch Jobs: [ ] All successful [ ] Failures: [detail]
ST22 ABAP Dumps: [ ] Zero dumps [ ] Dumps found: [detail]
SM21 System Log: [ ] No critical [ ] Criticals: [detail]
Interfaces: [ ] All green [ ] Issues: [detail]
ST03N Performance: [ ] Within SLA [ ] Degradation: [detail]
ACTIONS
-------
# | Action | Owner | Due Date | StatusHYPERCARE EXIT CRITERIA CHECKLIST
Project: [Name] | Exit Assessment Date: [Date]
STABILIZATION CRITERIA
-----------------------
Criterion | Target | Actual | Status
---------------------------------------------------|-------------|-----------|----------
Zero P1 incidents (consecutive business days) | 5 days | [X] days | [Met/Not]
P2 SLA compliance (last 5 business days) | 100% | [X]% | [Met/Not]
Batch jobs running without intervention (SM37) | 5 days | [X] days | [Met/Not]
Key processes completed by business without support | All in scope| [list] | [Met/Not]
Interface error rate below threshold | <0.5% | [X]% | [Met/Not]
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER
------------------
[ ] Configuration overview delivered to BAU
[ ] Known issues log handed over
[ ] Monitoring runbook delivered
[ ] Escalation procedure confirmed with BAU
[ ] BAU team handled at least one live issue end-to-end
LESSONS LEARNED
---------------
[ ] Session facilitated
[ ] Document distributed
[ ] Open actions assigned
EXIT DECISION
-------------
Hypercare Manager: [Name] — Signature: _______________ Date: ___
Client IT Manager: [Name] — Signature: _______________ Date: ___This skill is complete ONLY when ALL of the following are true:
Evidence required: Issue log with SLA tracking, daily standup minutes, weekly stabilization reports, root cause records for all P1/P2 tickets, KT sign-off sheet, lessons learned document, signed hypercare exit notice.
If any item is unchecked, hypercare has NOT been completed successfully. Do not declare exit.
After completing this skill, invoke: project-kickoff Conditions for handoff: Hypercare exit declared, system handed to BAU, lessons learned complete. This is the end of the SAP Activate delivery chain. If a follow-on phase or project exists, loop back to project-kickoff to begin the next engagement with lessons learned as a direct input.
go-live-readiness — Hypercare plan is assessed as part of Organizational Readiness; hypercare begins immediately on go-live declarationcutover-planning — Cutover runbook execution is the trigger event that starts Day 1 of hypercaretesting-strategy — Defects deferred from UAT become the initial P3/P4 hypercare backlogsap-reviewer agent — Use to analyze SM21 / ST22 logs for systemic error patterns during hypercare~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.