agentleFS
BorjablmBorjablm/claude-skills/field-inspection-prep/SKILL.md

field-inspection-prep

Skill2 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Prepare technical field inspections for sustainability certifications, subsidy reconciliations, supplier audits, and similar regulatory site visits. Locates the project's source documents (approved scope, supporting evidence, certificates, layouts), reconciles invoices against the approved scope per period, and generates a physical inspection checklist plus a gaps report. Supports initial inspections AND re-inspections where a prior period has already been verified and construction has since advanced (items now buried or covered). Triggered by: "prepare the inspection", "inspection checklist", "re-inspection", "approved scope", "site visit preparation", or when the user opens a folder matching project ID patterns.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Read the approved scope document and extract a structured list of items:

    line 56
  2. Very specific:

    Update the project's LEARNINGS.md with anything noteworthy

    line 84
  3. Very specific:

    Update patterns.json with any new heuristics for future visits

    line 85

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Field Inspection Preparation Skill

This skill supports an engineer or auditor preparing on-site inspections of projects that have been approved against a documented scope (subsidies, certifications, capital projects, supplier audits). It is a direct-reading skill: default behaviour is to open PDFs and Excel files directly rather than running scripts, because every project has its own quirks.

The skill is provider-agnostic. Localize document type names (e.g. final construction reports, certificates of conformity, invoices) to the language and regulatory context of your projects. Keep item descriptions in the original language used by the source documents.

The skill builds on optional CLAUDE.md, LEARNINGS.md, and patterns.json files in your project root. When present, these capture project-specific conventions so subsequent inspections inherit your accumulated knowledge.


Commands

locate

Find the key documents in the project folder.

  1. Scan the project root and sub-folders (typical: APPLICATION/, FINAL_REPORT/, amendments/, CERTIFICATES/, DOCS/, or whatever naming convention your projects use).
  2. Identify the approved final scope document — typically a final report or acceptance document signed off after award. Priority order:
    1. Most recent signed final report
    2. Approved scope amendment(s) if any
    3. Original application scope (only as fallback)
  3. Identify the supporting evidence per approved item:
    • Invoices / receipts (per period if multi-year)
    • Certificates of conformity (CE, ISO, B-Corp, etc.)
    • Layout drawings, photos, serial numbers
    • Material flow records or compliance attestations

extract

Read the approved scope document and extract a structured list of items:

  • Item ID (or generated)
  • Description (in the source language)
  • Approved value / quantity
  • Period or annuity (for multi-year projects)
  • Required evidence type

reinspect

For projects already partially verified in a prior period:

  1. Identify items previously confirmed as installed and accepted
  2. Flag items that may now be buried, enclosed, or otherwise inaccessible
  3. Build the re-inspection focus list: only newly-completed items or items contested in a prior visit
  4. Mark previously-verified items as out-of-scope for the current visit

checklist

Generate the on-site inspection checklist as a printable document:

  • One row per item with: ID, description, expected location, evidence to verify
  • Space for inspector notes, date, signature
  • Sorted by physical location for efficient site walk
  • Includes any flagged items from reinspect

print

Render the checklist to a print-ready PDF or HTML format using the included md_to_print_html.py script.

post-visit

After the inspection:

  1. Update the project's LEARNINGS.md with anything noteworthy
  2. Update patterns.json with any new heuristics for future visits
  3. Generate a gaps report listing items that could not be verified, with reasons

Project structure conventions

The skill assumes (but does not require) a project layout like:

<your-inspection-root>/
├── PROJECT-ID-YYYY-NNNNN/
│   ├── CLAUDE.md            # project-specific context (optional)
│   ├── LEARNINGS.md         # accumulated lessons (optional)
│   ├── patterns.json        # heuristics (optional)
│   ├── APPLICATION/        # initial application
│   ├── FINAL_REPORT/       # final justification report
│   ├── amendments/         # scope amendments
│   ├── CERTIFICATES/       # certificates of conformity
│   └── ...

Adapt the folder names to your own conventions; the skill reads what's there rather than requiring a specific structure.


Background

Originally built for a regional public-subsidy inspection workflow on aquaculture and food-processing facilities, then generalised for public release. The principles transfer cleanly to any inspection where you need to reconcile what was approved against what was actually built or supplied.

License: MIT. Created by azvai.com.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.