Scrap And Rework

---
name: scrap-and-rework
description: "Review scrap and rework so the largest cause gets an owner, and numbers tie to the floor. Use when the user mentions scrap review, rework, yield loss, waste review, or asks for a scrap review. Manufacturing and quality skill by Yasir Jilani."
license: MIT
compatibility: Agent Skills standard. No network access, extra packages, or credentials required.
metadata:
  author: Yasir Jilani
  version: "1.0.0"
  domain: manufacturing
---

<!-- GENERATED FILE - edits here are overwritten by scripts/generate.py.
     Edit the 'scrap-and-rework' entry in source/, then run:
       python3 scripts/generate.py && python3 scripts/validate.py
     See CONTRIBUTING.md. -->

# Scrap and Rework Review

Review scrap and rework so the largest cause gets an owner, and numbers tie to the floor.

## When to use this skill

Use this skill when the user:

- scrap review
- rework
- yield loss
- waste review

## When not to use this skill

- The user wants a different domain's specialist skill.
- The task requires a licensed professional to decide, and the user only needs a referral note rather than a draft.
- The request asks you to deceive, evade a control, or hide material facts.

## Professional boundary

Quality and safety procedures are drafts for the site's quality system. Do not bypass a hold, calibration, or safety step.

## Operating boundaries

- Use only information the user provides or files they explicitly ask you to read. Do not invent metrics, laws, citations, prices, credentials, or clinical facts.
- Do not ask for passwords, API keys, tokens, seed phrases, one-time codes, or payment card data.
- Do not send data to an external service, install packages, or add network calls as part of this skill.
- Separate facts, assumptions, and recommendations. If a required input is missing, state the assumption or ask one focused question.
- If the user asks you to deceive a person, evade a control, forge a record, or cause harm, stop. Offer a legitimate alternative.
- Work product that affects money, employment, health, safety, or legal rights is a draft for a qualified human to review before it is used.

## Inputs to collect

- Scrap quantities and reasons
- Cost if known
- Where it is found
- The owner of the top reason

## Workflow


### 1. Step 1

Use their quantities. Do not invent a scrap rate.
### 2. Step 2

Separate scrap from rework. They need different actions.
### 3. Step 3

Rank causes. Attack the largest evidenced one.
### 4. Step 4

Check whether the reason codes are honest or a dumping code.
### 5. Step 5

Assign an owner.
### 6. Step 6

Tie the number to inventory or quality records if they can. A side spreadsheet that does not tie is a finding.

## Output

Deliver a **scrap review**.

- Purpose of this scrap review, in two sentences.
- Facts the user supplied, listed separately from assumptions.
- The work itself, in the structure the workflow names.
- Open questions, risks, and the single next action with an owner.
- What a qualified reviewer still needs to confirm, if the domain is regulated.

## Quality bar

- Every number, date, name, and citation came from the user or is marked as an assumption.
- The artifact can be used without reading this skill again.
- Recommendations are specific enough that someone could accept or reject them.
- Boundaries were respected: no credentials requested, no unsupported professional claim, no deception.

## Example

### Scenario

Gus Moretti, plant manager at Redline Parts in Nisku, needs a scrap review by 30 September 2026. Most scrap is coded 'other' and the team still wants a root cause.

### Example data

```text
From: Gus Moretti, plant manager
Organization: Redline Parts, Nisku
Date: 14 September 2026
Needed by: 30 September 2026

Most scrap is coded 'other' and the team still wants a root cause.

Scrap quantities and reasons: Line 2. Partly documented: the what is written down, the who is not
Cost if known: CAD 27 direct. Overhead not in this line
Where it is found: Lot 26-0914, recorded 14 September 2026. No supporting file attached
The owner of the top reason: Gus Moretti, plant manager
```

### Example outcome

**Scrap review**
To: Gus Moretti, plant manager, Redline Parts
Date: 14 September 2026 · Needed by: 30 September 2026

**Decision**
Makes the dumping code the first problem and assigns an owner to fix the codes.

**What the file supports**

| Input | Value | Status |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Scrap quantities and reasons | Line 2. Partly documented: the what is written down, the who is not | Needs confirmation |
| Cost if known | CAD 27 direct. Overhead not in this line | Carried into the draft |
| Where it is found | Lot 26-0914, recorded 14 September 2026. No supporting file attached | Carried into the draft |
| The owner of the top reason | Gus Moretti, plant manager | Needs confirmation |

**How this draft was built**

**1. Use their quantities. Do not invent a scrap rate**

**2. Separate scrap from rework. They need different actions**

**3. Rank causes. Attack the largest evidenced one**

**4. Check whether the reason codes are honest or a dumping code**

**5. Assign an owner**

**Deliberately not done**
- An invented yield.
- A dumping code ignored.
- No owner.

**Open items for a human**
- Confirm every row marked *Needs confirmation* above before this leaves draft.
- Anything absent from the file stayed absent. No figure, date, or name was supplied from outside it.

Next: Gus Moretti by 30 September 2026. This is a draft, not a sign-off.

## Anti-patterns

- An invented yield
- A dumping code ignored
- No owner

## Related skills

- `nonconformance-report`
- `inventory-accounting`