- Home
- /Guides
- /operations
- /AI Incident Response: Handling AI System Failures
AI Incident Response: Handling AI System Failures
Learn to respond effectively when AI systems fail. From detection to resolutionâpractical procedures for managing AI incidents and minimizing harm.
By Marcin Piekarski ⢠Founder & Web Developer ⢠builtweb.com.au
AI-Assisted by: Prism AI (Prism AI represents the collaborative AI assistance in content creation.)
Last Updated: 7 December 2025
TL;DR
AI incidents are different from traditional software incidentsâthey can involve bias, harmful outputs, or subtle degradation that's hard to detect. Build incident response procedures that address AI-specific failure modes, include diverse responders, and focus on both technical fixes and harm mitigation.
Why it matters
When AI systems fail in production, the consequences can range from minor inconveniences to significant harm. Effective incident response minimizes damage, restores service quickly, and prevents recurrence. Without good procedures, incidents become crises.
AI incident types
Technical failures
System doesn't work as expected:
- Service unavailable
- Latency degradation
- Integration failures
- Resource exhaustion
Detection: Traditional monitoring (uptime, latency, error rates)
Quality degradation
System works but outputs degrade:
- Increased error rates
- Model drift
- Decreased relevance
- Inconsistent responses
Detection: Output quality monitoring, user feedback
Harmful outputs
System produces problematic content:
- Biased decisions
- Toxic or inappropriate content
- Privacy violations
- Dangerous information
Detection: Content moderation, user reports, audits
Security incidents
System is compromised or abused:
- Prompt injection attacks
- Data exfiltration
- Model extraction attempts
- Unauthorized access
Detection: Security monitoring, anomaly detection
Incident response framework
Phase 1: Detection
Monitoring sources:
- Automated alerts (technical metrics)
- Quality monitoring systems
- User reports and feedback
- Social media monitoring
- Internal testing
Severity classification:
| Severity | Impact | Response time |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Widespread harm, safety risk | Immediate |
| High | Significant user impact | Within 1 hour |
| Medium | Limited impact, workarounds exist | Within 4 hours |
| Low | Minor issues | Within 24 hours |
Phase 2: Triage
Initial assessment:
- What is happening?
- How many users affected?
- Is there ongoing harm?
- What's the scope?
- Is it getting worse?
Key decisions:
- Escalation needed?
- Immediate mitigation required?
- Who needs to be notified?
- Public communication needed?
Phase 3: Containment
Mitigation options:
- Disable affected feature
- Rollback to previous version
- Activate fallback system
- Rate limit or throttle
- Add guardrails
Communication:
- Notify stakeholders
- Update status page
- Prepare user messaging
- Brief support teams
Phase 4: Resolution
Technical remediation:
- Identify root cause
- Develop and test fix
- Deploy fix safely
- Verify resolution
Harm remediation:
- Identify affected users
- Assess impact
- Determine remediation needs
- Execute remediation plan
Phase 5: Post-incident
Immediate:
- Confirm resolution
- Update stakeholders
- Close incident
Follow-up:
- Conduct post-mortem
- Document lessons learned
- Implement preventive measures
- Update procedures
AI-specific considerations
Handling bias incidents
When AI shows discriminatory behavior:
Immediate actions:
- Document the behavior
- Assess scope and impact
- Consider disabling until fixed
- Notify compliance/legal
Investigation:
- Analyze affected decisions
- Review training data
- Check for systematic patterns
- Consult affected communities
Remediation:
- Correct affected decisions
- Fix underlying cause
- Apologize where appropriate
- Implement monitoring
Handling harmful content
When AI generates problematic outputs:
Immediate actions:
- Add filters for identified content
- Review recent outputs
- Alert content moderation
- Consider feature disable
Investigation:
- How was safety bypassed?
- What prompts triggered it?
- Are there systematic gaps?
- What was the exposure?
Remediation:
- Update content filters
- Improve model guardrails
- Notify affected users
- Update safety testing
Incident response team
Core roles
Incident Commander:
- Owns overall response
- Makes key decisions
- Coordinates responders
- Manages communications
Technical Lead:
- Drives technical investigation
- Coordinates engineering response
- Validates fixes
Communications Lead:
- Manages stakeholder communications
- Drafts public statements
- Coordinates with PR/legal
AI-specific roles
Consider including:
- AI/ML expert (model behavior)
- Ethics/bias specialist
- Domain expert (affected area)
- Legal/compliance (regulatory issues)
Documentation
During incident
Track in real-time:
- Timeline of events
- Actions taken
- Decisions made
- Who was involved
- Communications sent
Post-incident report
Document:
- Incident summary
- Timeline
- Root cause
- Impact assessment
- Response evaluation
- Lessons learned
- Action items
Common mistakes
| Mistake | Problem | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| No AI-specific procedures | Missing AI failure modes | Adapt procedures for AI |
| Slow detection | Damage accumulates | Comprehensive monitoring |
| Technical-only response | Missing harm mitigation | Include ethics/communications |
| Skip post-mortem | Same incidents recur | Always conduct review |
| Blame individuals | Systemic issues persist | Focus on process improvement |
What's next
Build robust AI operations:
- Monitoring AI Systems â Detect issues early
- AI Deployment Lifecycle â Safer deployments
- MLOps for LLMs â Operational best practices
Frequently Asked Questions
How do we detect AI quality issues before users report them?
Implement output quality monitoring: automated evaluation on samples, anomaly detection for output patterns, sentiment analysis on outputs, and regular human review. Compare against baselines and alert on degradation.
When should we disable an AI feature vs. try to fix it live?
Disable when: active harm is occurring, you can't contain the issue, the fix will take significant time, or user trust is at risk. Fix live when: impact is limited, you have a quick fix, and you can monitor closely during the fix.
How do we handle incidents involving third-party AI services?
Have fallback plans for third-party dependencies. Monitor their status. Include their support contacts in your runbook. Know your SLAs and escalation paths. Consider whether to communicate their issues to your users.
Should every AI issue go through incident response?
No. Reserve formal incident response for significant issues. Minor bugs can go through normal bug tracking. Define clear thresholds: user impact, harm potential, and business impact should trigger incident response.
Was this guide helpful?
Your feedback helps us improve our guides
About the Authors
Marcin Piekarski⢠Founder & Web Developer
Marcin is a web developer with 15+ years of experience, specializing in React, Vue, and Node.js. Based in Western Sydney, Australia, he's worked on projects for major brands including Gumtree, CommBank, Woolworths, and Optus. He uses AI tools, workflows, and agents daily in both his professional and personal life, and created Field Guide to AI to help others harness these productivity multipliers effectively.
Credentials & Experience:
- 15+ years web development experience
- Worked with major brands: Gumtree, CommBank, Woolworths, Optus, NestlĂŠ, M&C Saatchi
- Founder of builtweb.com.au
- Daily AI tools user: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, AI coding assistants
- Specializes in modern frameworks: React, Vue, Node.js
Areas of Expertise:
Prism AI⢠AI Research & Writing Assistant
Prism AI is the AI ghostwriter behind Field Guide to AIâa collaborative ensemble of frontier models (Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, and others) that assist with research, drafting, and content synthesis. Like light through a prism, human expertise is refracted through multiple AI perspectives to create clear, comprehensive guides. All AI-generated content is reviewed, fact-checked, and refined by Marcin before publication.
Capabilities:
- Powered by frontier AI models: Claude (Anthropic), GPT-4 (OpenAI), Gemini (Google)
- Specializes in research synthesis and content drafting
- All output reviewed and verified by human experts
- Trained on authoritative AI documentation and research papers
Specializations:
Transparency Note: All AI-assisted content is thoroughly reviewed, fact-checked, and refined by Marcin Piekarski before publication. AI helps with research and drafting, but human expertise ensures accuracy and quality.
Key Terms Used in This Guide
Related Guides
AI Deployment Lifecycle: From Development to Production
IntermediateLearn the stages of deploying AI systems safely. From staging to productionâpractical guidance for each phase of the AI deployment lifecycle.
Monitoring AI Systems in Production
IntermediateProduction AI requires continuous monitoring. Track performance, detect drift, alert on failures, and maintain quality over time.
AI Cost Management: Controlling AI Spending
IntermediateLearn to manage and optimize AI costs. From usage tracking to cost optimization strategiesâpractical guidance for keeping AI spending under control.