An audit report must let a reader who was not there understand what was audited, against what, what was found
with what evidence, and what the auditee must do next. scripts/report_build.py builds the report from a JSON
audit record and refuses to call a report complete when ISO 19011 content is missing.
Trigger Conditions
Activate this skill when the user:
- Has finished an internal, supplier or readiness audit and needs the report
- Wants a standard audit report template for the audit programme
- Needs an auditor's report reviewed for completeness
- Must summarise audit results for management review
Individual findings: qms-audit-finding-writer.
Workflow
1. RECORD -> audit.json: objectives, scope, criteria, dates, team, auditees, sampled items, strengths, findings
2. CHECK -> lint findings first (qms-audit-finding-writer)
3. BUILD -> python scripts/report_build.py audit.json > report.md
4. CONCLUDE -> review the generated conclusion; tailor it to the audit objectives
5. CLOSE -> closing meeting: present strengths and findings, agree facts, set deadlines
6. ISSUE -> within 5 working days; track responses and verificationReport Structure
| Section | Content |
|---|---|
| Header | Type, site, dates, lead auditor, team, auditees |
| 1 Summary | Conclusion + count of major / minor / OFI |
| 2-4 | Objectives, scope, criteria (with revisions) |
| 5 Method and sampling | What was sampled; audit is a sample |
| 6 Strengths | Specific, evidence-based |
| 7 Findings | Table, then requirement / evidence / statement per finding |
| 8 Diverging opinions | Or "none, agreed at closing meeting" |
| 9 Follow-up | Response content and deadline |
| 10 Distribution | Who receives the report |
Required vs recommended elements, conclusion patterns and specific strengths: report-contents.md. Closing meeting agenda, response expectations and how to verify and close findings: closing-meeting-and-follow-up.md.
Generated Conclusion
| Findings | Conclusion |
|---|---|
| Any major | Not effectively implemented; corrective action and verification required |
| Minors only | Implemented and generally effective, with N minor nonconformities |
| None | Conforms and is effectively implemented within the scope |
Output Format
Deliver the report Markdown (from report_build.py), followed by:
- Completeness check - RP001/RP002 warnings resolved.
- Response tracker - finding, owner, due date for root cause/action, verification method.
Scripts
python scripts/report_build.py audit.json > report.mdKeys: audit_id, type, organization, site, objectives, scope, criteria, start, end, lead_auditor, team, auditees, sampled, strengths, findings (id, grade, clause, requirement, evidence, statement), conclusion, diverging_opinions, distribution, response_due_days. Warnings go to stderr: RP001 missing objectives/scope/criteria/start/lead auditor, RP002 nonconformity without clause or evidence. Exit codes: 0 complete, 1 written but incomplete, 2 read or JSON error.
Additional Resources
| File | Content |
|---|---|
| report-contents.md | ISO 19011 6.5 content, conclusion patterns, strengths, timing and style |
| closing-meeting-and-follow-up.md | Closing meeting agenda, response expectations, verification and closure, feeding the programme |
8d-problem-solving-report-writer
Write and review 8D problem-solving reports for customer complaints and serious nonconformities (automotive and aerospace practice: Ford Global 8D, VDA, GM, Stellantis formats): D0 emergency response, D1 cross-functional team and champion, D2 problem description with 5W2H and is / is-not and no cause in the statement, D3 interim containment within 24 hours with verification and clean point, D4 verified occurrence and escape (non-detection) root causes plus systemic cause, D5 permanent corrective actions for each cause verified before implementation, D6 implementation, validation with production data and removal of containment, D7 PFMEA, control plan and read-across to similar products, D8 closure and recognition. Checks an 8D discipline by discipline for missing content, human-error root causes, missing escape cause or action, late containment and dates out of order.
acceptance-sampling-plan-selector
Select and evaluate acceptance sampling plans for incoming, in-process and final inspection: ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 / ISO 2859-1 single sampling under normal inspection (code letter from lot size and inspection level I, II, III, S-1 to S-4; sample size, Ac and Re from AQL, following the table's arrows to the correct plan; 100% when n reaches the lot size; AQLs above 10 per 100 units), operating characteristic curves (Pa at any quality, producer's quality level, indifference point, LTPD, AOQ and AOQL, binomial or hypergeometric), plans designed from producer and consumer risk, and c = 0 zero-acceptance plans. Covers AQL choice by defect class, switching rules between normal, tightened and reduced inspection, when sampling is not appropriate, and random sampling.
approved-supplier-list-manager
Manage and audit an approved supplier list (ASL) / external provider register for ISO 9001 8.4.1, IATF 16949 8.4 and AS9100 8.4.1: supplier status (approved, conditional, probation, pending, disqualified), scope of approval by commodity and process, risk class, certification and expiry, re-evaluation intervals by risk, conditions with end dates, single-source contingency, approver and customer-directed sources. Audits the list for expired or expiring certificates, overdue re-evaluations, conditional or probation status past its decision date, high-risk suppliers without the required certification, single-source suppliers without backup and missing approvers, and checks purchase orders for suppliers that are off-list, disqualified or pending, or buying outside the approved scope. Covers ERP blocks, PO requirements, off-list and emergency purchases.
apqp-phase-planner
Plan and track Advanced Product Quality Planning (AIAG APQP 3rd edition, IATF 16949) for a new or changed automotive part: back-schedule the five phases (plan and define, product design, process design, product and process validation, launch and feedback) from the start-of-production date by program complexity, with overlap, PPAP lead and safe-launch period; list the deliverables and gate for each phase (DFMEA, DVP&R, feasibility, process flow, PFMEA, control plans, MSA, Ppk, run at rate, PPAP, safe launch, lessons learned); adjust for build-to-print suppliers; flag compressed timelines and late or untracked deliverables against a status list. Covers gate reviews, red/yellow/green status reporting, run at rate and safe-launch exit criteria.
as9100-gap-analyzer
Run an AS9100D / EN 9100:2018 gap analysis for aviation, space and defence suppliers on the requirements added to ISO 9001: on-time delivery and conformity focus, management representative, ethics and human-factors awareness, operational planning and operational risk management, configuration management, product safety, counterfeit-part prevention, special requirements, critical items and key characteristics, external provider register and flow-down, FOD prevention, tooling and NC program control, special process validation, first article inspection (AS9102), traceability, in-service data and nonconforming product control. Generates and scores a worksheet, grades missing core controls as major, and checks invalid n/a claims. Covers AS9101/AS9104, OASIS, AS9102 FAI forms, counterfeit standards (AS5553, AS6174, AS6081), NADCAP and the planned IA9100 transition.
capa-effectiveness-checker
Verify whether a corrective action actually worked (ISO 9001 10.2.1 d, IATF 16949, 8D D6) with statistics instead of 'no complaints so far': before/after defect-rate comparison with an exact conditional binomial test for Poisson counts and a minimum practical reduction, zero-defect demonstration size (n = ln(1-C)/ln(1-p), rule of three) with progress so far, and exact Clopper-Pearson upper bounds on the post-action defect rate. Returns effective, not yet demonstrated (with the units still needed) or not effective. Covers setting effectiveness criteria when the CAPA is opened, choosing the window by problem frequency, leading indicators for rare failures (Cpk, SPC stability, error-proofing checks, LPA), and traps such as volume changes, detection changes and containment masking.