Generated banner for Performance Slo Planner
Generated logo for Performance Slo Planner

Performance Slo Planner

MicrosoftOfficialPublished by Microsoft

  • Skill
  • Content generator
  • Software development
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Performance, load, and reliability (SLO/SRE) planning for production readiness. Use when defining service level objectives, load characterization, capacity, latency budgets, stress/soak/spike test plans, false-positive baselines, and reliability targets. USE FOR: SLO/SLA definition, load testing plan, performance budget, capacity planning, reliability/SRE backlog, latency targets, error-budget policy. DO NOT USE FOR: executing load tests (use Azure Load Testing tooling), security threat modeling, RAI assessment, privacy/compliance planning, or authoring/restating PRD requirements (cite the PRD's existing NFR/FR ids instead).
— the description by Microsoft

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

The Performance & SLO/SRE Planner provides a systematic approach to defining production readiness requirements. It helps teams translate vague performance goals into concrete Service Level Indicators (SLIs), Service Level Objectives (SLOs), and detailed load test matrices. By anchoring plans to existing product requirements and identifying necessary observability hooks, the skill ensures that reliability targets are measurable and actionable. It is designed as a planning tool that produces a structured document to guide subsequent execution using specialized load testing infrastructure.

What it does

  • Identifies measurable SLIs for critical user journeys.
  • Defines SLOs, error budgets, and measurement windows.
  • Creates load profiles including steady-state, peak, spike, and soak scenarios.
  • Builds a comprehensive test matrix mapping load profiles to performance thresholds.
  • Identifies observability requirements needed to track SLIs in production.
  • Generates a reliability backlog for production-readiness tracking.

When to use it

  • Before launching a new service or feature to production.
  • When a system lacks characterized load behavior or performance baselines.
  • When establishing formal error budgets and reliability targets.
  • During the preparation phase for a production-readiness review.

Advantages

  • Ensures performance goals are anchored to measurable indicators.
  • Provides a clear, standardized format for reliability planning.
  • Distinguishes between planning and execution to maintain focus.
  • Promotes the inclusion of graceful degradation strategies in system design.

Usage examples

“Create a performance plan for our new incident ingestion service.”
The agent will generate a structured markdown document containing SLO tables, load models, a test matrix, and a reliability backlog based on provided business goals and NFRs.
“Define the load model and test matrix for our dispatch action flow.”
The agent will output a table detailing steady-state and peak concurrency requirements, duration, and pass/fail thresholds for the specified user journey.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/microsoft/performance-slo-planner/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip performance-slo-planner.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Microsoft

Performance & SLO/SRE Planner

Turn vague "it should be fast and reliable" expectations into measurable SLIs, SLOs, a load model, a test matrix, and a reliability backlog for production readiness. Pairs with Azure Load Testing tooling for execution. This skill plans; it does not run the tests.

When to Use

  • Defining service level objectives and error budgets before launch.

  • Characterizing load behavior (steady, peak, spike, soak) for a system with "no characterized load."

  • Setting latency/throughput budgets and a false-positive/accuracy baseline.

  • Producing a reliability/SRE backlog for a production-readiness review.

When Not to Use

  • Running the load tests: hand the test matrix to the Azure Load Testing tools.

  • Security, RAI, or privacy concerns: use the respective specialist skill.

  • Authoring or restating requirements: cite the PRD's existing NFR ids rather than re-deriving targets.

  • Redefining user journeys: reference the PRD's existing FR ids rather than inventing flows.

Inputs

Gather what exists; flag what is missing as an assumption to validate.

  1. Business goals (BRD): the business objectives and risk tolerance behind the targets (for example revenue-critical flows, contractual SLAs) that justify each SLO and error budget.

  2. Critical user journeys: the flows that must stay fast (for example: incident ingest → display, dispatch action, alert acknowledge).

  3. Stated NFRs (PRD): latency/availability targets from the PRD's NFRs, Success Metrics, and Operational Readiness sections (for example stratified SLAs like "Critical ≤ 60s, Standard ≤ 3min").

  4. Traffic assumptions: expected and peak concurrency, request rates, and growth.

  5. Accuracy expectations: false-positive tolerance where relevant (for example alerting).

Procedure

  1. Identify SLIs. For each critical journey pick measurable indicators: latency (p50/p95/p99), availability, error rate, and accuracy/false-positive rate where relevant.

  2. Set SLOs and error budgets. For each SLI define a target, a measurement window, and the resulting error budget. Anchor each SLO to a specific PRD NFR id when present; otherwise propose a target and mark it [ASSUMPTION] for tuning.

  3. Define the load model. Specify steady-state, peak, spike, and soak profiles with concurrency/rate and duration for each.

  4. Build the test matrix. Map each load profile to the journeys it exercises, the pass/fail SLO thresholds, and the environment.

  5. Plan capacity and degradation. Note scaling assumptions, saturation points, and required graceful-degradation behavior (no silent fidelity drops).

  6. List observability hooks. Name the metrics/traces needed to measure each SLI in production; an SLO you cannot measure is not real.

  7. Write the backlog to .copilot-tracking/performance-plans/<date>-performance-slo-plan.md using the Output Format.

Output Format

# Performance & SLO Plan: <app>

## SLOs
| SLI         | Journey         | Target           | Window         | Error budget | Source                 |
|-------------|-----------------|------------------|----------------|--------------|------------------------|
| p95 latency | dispatch action | ≤ 60s end-to-end | 28-day rolling | 1%           | NFR-123 / [ASSUMPTION] |

## Load model
| Profile             | Concurrency / rate | Duration | Purpose  |
|---------------------|--------------------|----------|----------|
| Steady              | ...                | ...      | baseline |
| Peak / Spike / Soak | ...                | ...      | ...      |

## Test matrix
| Test | Profile | Journeys | Pass threshold | Env |
|------|---------|----------|----------------|-----|

## Observability hooks
- <metric/trace needed to measure each SLI>

## Backlog
1. <item>: priority, depends-on, SLO it protects

> [!CAUTION]
> This plan is an assistive artifact and does not replace professional performance, reliability, or SRE review. Validate SLO targets, error budgets, and rollback triggers with the owning team before acting on them.

Principles

  • Measurable or it's not an SLO. Every target needs a defined SLI and a way to measure it in production.

  • Anchor to the PRD, mark the rest. Use stated NFRs verbatim; flag proposed numbers [ASSUMPTION] for agency/environment tuning.

  • Plan, don't run. Output a test matrix the Azure Load Testing tools can execute; do not execute here.

  • Degradation is a requirement. Define what graceful degradation looks like, not just the happy path.

  • Review-required. This plan is assistive: carry the professional-review disclaimer and validate targets and budgets with the owning team before acting.

Files

SKILL.md

Performance & SLO/SRE Planner

Turn vague "it should be fast and reliable" expectations into measurable SLIs, SLOs, a load model, a test matrix, and a reliability backlog for production readiness. Pairs with Azure Load Testing tooling for execution. This skill plans; it does not run the tests.

When to Use

  • Defining service level objectives and error budgets before launch.

  • Characterizing load behavior (steady, peak, spike, soak) for a system with "no characterized load."

  • Setting latency/throughput budgets and a false-positive/accuracy baseline.

  • Producing a reliability/SRE backlog for a production-readiness review.

When Not to Use

  • Running the load tests: hand the test matrix to the Azure Load Testing tools.

  • Security, RAI, or privacy concerns: use the respective specialist skill.

  • Authoring or restating requirements: cite the PRD's existing NFR ids rather than re-deriving targets.

  • Redefining user journeys: reference the PRD's existing FR ids rather than inventing flows.

Inputs

Gather what exists; flag what is missing as an assumption to validate.

  1. Business goals (BRD): the business objectives and risk tolerance behind the targets (for example revenue-critical flows, contractual SLAs) that justify each SLO and error budget.

  2. Critical user journeys: the flows that must stay fast (for example: incident ingest → display, dispatch action, alert acknowledge).

  3. Stated NFRs (PRD): latency/availability targets from the PRD's NFRs, Success Metrics, and Operational Readiness sections (for example stratified SLAs like "Critical ≤ 60s, Standard ≤ 3min").

  4. Traffic assumptions: expected and peak concurrency, request rates, and growth.

  5. Accuracy expectations: false-positive tolerance where relevant (for example alerting).

Procedure

  1. Identify SLIs. For each critical journey pick measurable indicators: latency (p50/p95/p99), availability, error rate, and accuracy/false-positive rate where relevant.

  2. Set SLOs and error budgets. For each SLI define a target, a measurement window, and the resulting error budget. Anchor each SLO to a specific PRD NFR id when present; otherwise propose a target and mark it [ASSUMPTION] for tuning.

  3. Define the load model. Specify steady-state, peak, spike, and soak profiles with concurrency/rate and duration for each.

  4. Build the test matrix. Map each load profile to the journeys it exercises, the pass/fail SLO thresholds, and the environment.

  5. Plan capacity and degradation. Note scaling assumptions, saturation points, and required graceful-degradation behavior (no silent fidelity drops).

  6. List observability hooks. Name the metrics/traces needed to measure each SLI in production; an SLO you cannot measure is not real.

  7. Write the backlog to .copilot-tracking/performance-plans/<date>-performance-slo-plan.md using the Output Format.

Output Format

# Performance & SLO Plan: <app>

## SLOs
| SLI         | Journey         | Target           | Window         | Error budget | Source                 |
|-------------|-----------------|------------------|----------------|--------------|------------------------|
| p95 latency | dispatch action | ≤ 60s end-to-end | 28-day rolling | 1%           | NFR-123 / [ASSUMPTION] |

## Load model
| Profile             | Concurrency / rate | Duration | Purpose  |
|---------------------|--------------------|----------|----------|
| Steady              | ...                | ...      | baseline |
| Peak / Spike / Soak | ...                | ...      | ...      |

## Test matrix
| Test | Profile | Journeys | Pass threshold | Env |
|------|---------|----------|----------------|-----|

## Observability hooks
- <metric/trace needed to measure each SLI>

## Backlog
1. <item>: priority, depends-on, SLO it protects

> [!CAUTION]
> This plan is an assistive artifact and does not replace professional performance, reliability, or SRE review. Validate SLO targets, error budgets, and rollback triggers with the owning team before acting on them.

Principles

  • Measurable or it's not an SLO. Every target needs a defined SLI and a way to measure it in production.

  • Anchor to the PRD, mark the rest. Use stated NFRs verbatim; flag proposed numbers [ASSUMPTION] for agency/environment tuning.

  • Plan, don't run. Output a test matrix the Azure Load Testing tools can execute; do not execute here.

  • Degradation is a requirement. Define what graceful degradation looks like, not just the happy path.

  • Review-required. This plan is assistive: carry the professional-review disclaimer and validate targets and budgets with the owning team before acting.

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: GitHub Copilot, Claude Code

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Claude Code frontmatter

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Published by
Microsoft
Publisher
Microsoft (Official)
Source
microsoft/hve-core · .github/skills/project-planning/performance-slo-planner · commit f425e94
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Microsoft.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download performance-slo-planner.zip