5 Why works when each answer is a checkable fact, the chain ends in a process or system you can change, and the
team asks not only why it happened but also why it was not caught. scripts/whys_check.py finds the usual logic
gaps and prints the reverse "therefore" test so the team can read the chain back.
Trigger Conditions
Activate this skill when the user:
- Is running a 5 Why session for an NCR, complaint, CAPA or 8D D4
- Has a 5 Why that ends in "operator error" or "not trained"
- Wants a root cause reviewed before committing to actions
- Asks how to do 5 Why properly or when to stop
When there are many candidate causes, start with quality-fishbone-diagram-builder; for the action plan, capa-plan-writer.
Workflow
1. GEMBA -> go to where it happened with parts, records and the people doing the work
2. PROBLEM -> "Problem: <effect, where, how many, when>" - no cause
3. ASK -> "Why:" lines; one fact per line; branch when an answer has two causes
4. LEGS -> "## Occurrence", "## Escape" (why not detected), optional "## Systemic"
5. CHECK -> python scripts/whys_check.py analysis.txt
6. THEREFORE -> read each chain bottom-up; every link must follow
7. VERIFY -> switch the cause on/off, reproduce it, or confirm with data before actingFormat
Problem: 40 of 200 VB-2210 parts had bore 12.021-12.030 mm (drawing max 12.018) in lot L2609-14
## Occurrence
Why: The boring insert wore beyond the size limit before the tool change
Why: Tool change interval is 400 parts but the new insert grade wears out at about 250 parts
Why: The interval was not re-validated when the insert grade changed in August
Why: Tooling grade changes are not covered by the change-control procedure QP-11
## Escape
Why: Only 1 in 50 parts gets an in-process bore check
...Checks (whys_check.py)
| Code | Severity | Problem |
|---|---|---|
| WY001 | high | No problem statement, or it contains a cause |
| WY002 | high | Chain ends in blame / human error |
| WY003 | medium | Under 3 or over 7 whys |
| WY004 | medium | Answer repeats the previous one |
| WY005 | medium | Ends outside your control (customer, supplier, weather) |
| WY006 | medium | Two causes in one answer: branch |
| WY007 | low | Vague answer |
| WY008 | low | Only one leg: add escape |
Session rules, stopping criteria, verification methods and when to use another tool: facilitation-guide.md. Weak vs strong chains from machining, assembly and office work, and common traps: worked-examples.md.
Output Format
Deliver:
- Problem statement (effect only).
- Chains per leg (occurrence, escape, systemic) with the evidence for each answer.
- Therefore test result.
- Root causes - the controllable cause at the end of each leg and how it was verified.
- Hand-off - one action per root cause, ranked by strength (see capa-plan-writer).
Scripts
python scripts/whys_check.py analysis.txt
cat analysis.txt | python scripts/whys_check.py -Lines: Problem: ..., Why: ... (or 1., Why 2:), and ## <leg> headings. Exit codes: 0 no high issues,
1 high issues, 2 unreadable file or no Why lines.
Additional Resources
| File | Content |
|---|---|
| facilitation-guide.md | Preparation, session rules, three legs, therefore test, verification, when 5 Why is not enough |
| worked-examples.md | Machining, assembly and office examples, weak vs strong, common traps |
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.
audit-report-writer
Write internal, supplier and pre-certification audit reports with the content ISO 19011:2018 6.5 expects: audit objectives, scope, criteria with revisions, dates, team and auditees, method and sampling statement, specific strengths, findings table and three-part finding details (requirement, evidence, statement), conclusion on the degree of fulfilment of criteria, diverging opinions, follow-up deadlines and distribution. Builds a Markdown report from a JSON audit record, generates the conclusion from the findings (major / minor / none) and flags reports missing required content or findings without clause or evidence. Covers conclusion wording, closing meetings, response expectations and verifying corrective actions.