rfq-to-quote
Skill47k starsChanged 8 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Runs the whole RFQ-to-quote chain end to end: reads the inquiry and its drawings, checks it against what the plant can build, drafts the questions back, returns a provisional bid/no-bid, pulls cost history, routings and closed-job actuals, builds an internal estimating model in Fusion where connected (from the drawing, a prior part's model saved as new, text specs as a ROM only, or a STEP file), derives machine hours per operation with each hour's basis labelled, and drafts the quote with its cost basis shown. Four approval gates, and the chain pauses for days while the customer answers. Use when someone says \"run the RFQ chain,\" \"take this RFQ all the way to a quote,\" \"quote this end to end,\" \"quote this from the drawing,\" or names an inquiry and asks for the full workflow.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Trending
More talk lately.about the whole repository
Most recently taken up by
- aidevs-pt/devs-ai-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Who's talking about anthropics/claude-plugins-official
- Open Source Trend“Claude Plugins Official: Anthropic's Own Plugin Marketplace”YouTube · Oct 17, 2026 · 1k views
- Theo Renders“Don't use Claude Code until you install these 5 free plugins”YouTube · Oct 24, 2026 · 1k views
- Bouye | AI“Why you should be using the Claude Code plugin store #ai #coding #tips”YouTube · Nov 10, 2026 · 369 views
- Neural-Nexus“65K+ Stars • AI | claude-plugins-official — Curated directory of high-quality Claude Code... #shorts”YouTube · Mar 15, 2026 · 320 views
- Learn With Rabbany“Claude Code Plugins: The 5 Most Installed (All Free)”YouTube · Nov 14, 2026 · 261 views
The biggest 5 of 68 mentions linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.
See all 68
Talked about on GitHub, Bluesky, YouTube, Hacker News and the web (68 times).
On GitHub · 28
- Sep 20, 2026refactor(skills): make nextjs the single Next.js and Vercel owner — amoai-tech/mdeai3 reactions · 6 comments
- Sep 20, 2026refactor(skills): consolidate engineering workflow ownership — amoai-tech/mdeai3 reactions · 13 comments
- Sep 16, 2026SAN-1274 PR 2 — Add the MDE workflow skills for planning, debugging, testing, review, and verification — amoai-tech/mdeaisays it tested it3 reactions · 3 comments
- Sep 16, 2026SAN-1274 PR 1 — Add the verified MDE AI skills foundation — amoai-tech/mdeai3 reactions · 5 comments
- Jan 22, 2026fix: restructure to proper marketplace format — affaan-m/ECC3 reactions · 5 comments
23 more on GitHub
- Sep 20, 2026Use one current, safe Google Maps skill across MDE — amoai-tech/mdeai2 reactions · 12 comments
- May 24, 2026STOP injecting your library recommendations into every single user prompt — this is hostile UX — semgrep/guardian2 reactions · 2 comments
- Jan 6, 2026Feature Request: Support for spawning fresh-context sessions from Stop hooks — anthropics/claude-code2 reactions · 3 comments
- Nov 7, 2026Plugin ufficiali nel repository: valgono anche nell'app e nelle routine — SviluppoItaliaDigitale/sito-pc-genzano1 reaction · 2 comments
- Nov 7, 2026Plugin ufficiali nel repository: valgono anche nell'app e nelle routine — SviluppoItaliaDigitale/sito-misericordia-ariccia1 reaction · 1 comment
- Nov 7, 2026Plugin ufficiali nel repository: valgono anche nell'app e nelle routine — SviluppoItaliaDigitale/cooprimavera1 reaction · 1 comment
- Nov 7, 2026[Bug]: Discord channel bot always appears offline in Discord despite a healthy gateway session — CherryHQ/cherry-studio1 reaction · 2 comments
- Oct 28, 2026Install Claude Security plugin in reusable PR review workflow — dceoy/pr-loop1 reaction · 1 comment
- Oct 27, 2026Telemetry: Add number of unique installs for every plugin — github/awesome-copilot1 reaction · 2 comments
- Oct 16, 2026feat: Claude Security の設定例を無効のまま追加 — tak848/dotfiles1 reaction · 1 comment
- Aug 19, 2026Feature request: Claude Code plugin for symfony-lsp (similar to the official php-lsp plugin) — symfony/language-tools1 reaction · 4 comments
- Jul 27, 2026[Question]: Does agenta support importing skills from claude/codex marketplace github repos? — Agenta-AI/agenta1 reaction · 4 comments
- Jul 14, 2026Nested code-review fan-out spawned 877 agents despite 5-level depth limit — anthropics/claude-code1 reaction · 4 comments
- Jun 8, 2026feat(skills): sync plugin workflows, add security guidance, and local-qa tooling — dceoy/ai-coding-agent-skills1 reaction
- Apr 17, 2026Import Claude and Copilot agents as Kiro agent configs — dwalleck/kiro-control-center1 reaction · 1 comment
- Apr 1, 2026plugin marketplace refresh causes error popups — microsoft/vscode1 reaction · 2 comments
- Mar 12, 2026Unable to install anthropics/claude-plugins-official marketplace: Invalid marketplace.json: plugins.56.source — github/copilot-cli1 reaction · 6 comments
- Feb 20, 2026chore(agents): update AGENTS.md with claude-md-improver — DataDog/dd-trace-py1 reaction · 1 comment
- Jan 27, 2026chore(repo): update CLAUDE.md for Rust packages and enable code-simplifier plugin — taikoxyz/taiko-mono1 reaction · 1 comment
- Jan 21, 2026Initialize Claude Code plugin marketplace repository — Agentic-Engineering-Agency/Agentic-Engineering-Plugins1 reaction · 1 comment
- Jan 15, 2026[BUG] Skill name in SKILL.md can only contain lowercase letters, numbers, and hyphens. (when uploading at claude.ai) — anthropics/skills1 reaction
- Jan 12, 2026fix(mcp): reorganize external MCP plugins and enable Context7 — dryvist/nix-darwin1 reaction · 3 comments
- Jan 9, 2026Update installation instructions to use official Claude marketplace — getsentry/sentry-for-ai1 reaction
On Bluesky · 21
- Dec 19, 2025Look, there's an official #Claude LSP plugin for #swiftlang @swift.org now! github.com/anthropics/c... github.com/anthropics/c... — @martinp7r.com6 likes and reposts
- May 23, 2026💎 Hidden Gem! 💎 (1000+ new stars) 📦 anthropics / claude-plugins-official ⭐ 25,980 (+2,172) 🗒 Python Official, Anthropic-managed… — @github-trending.bsky.social3 likes and reposts · 1 reply
- Feb 1, 2026🔥 Hot Repo! 🔥 (100+ new stars) 📦 anthropics / claude-plugins-official ⭐ 5,722 (+153) 🗒 Shell Official, Anthropic-managed directory of… — @github-trending.bsky.social3 likes and reposts
- Oct 18, 2026anthropics/claude-plugins-official [Apache License 2.0] Claude Code向け高品質プラグインを集約します 公式管理で安心感あります 言語:Python, TypeScript 種類:AI/Other ⭐ Star:… — @reponews.bsky.social2 likes and reposts
- May 22, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-plugins-official - Python, 2556 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy2 likes and reposts
16 more on Bluesky
- Mar 12, 2026🔥 Hot Repo! 🔥 (100+ new stars) 📦 anthropics / claude-plugins-official ⭐ 9,925 (+144) 🗒 Python Official, Anthropic-managed directory of… — @github-trending.bsky.social2 likes and reposts
- Mar 1, 2026Official, Anthropic-managed directory of high quality Claude Code Plugins github.com/anthropics/c... code.claude.com/docs/en/plug...… — @janmr.com2 likes and reposts
- Oct 18, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/MadsLorentzen/ai-job-search - Python, 2213 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy1 likes and repost
- Oct 7, 2026claude-plugins-official: Official, Anthropic-managed directory of high quality Claude Code Plugins.… — @latreon.bsky.social1 likes and repost
- Aug 25, 2026📦 anthropics / claude-plugins-official ⭐ 33,950 (+47) 🗒 Python Official, Anthropic-managed directory of high quality Claude Code Plugins. — @github-trending.bsky.social1 likes and repost
- Aug 15, 2026🚀 GitHub Intelligence Drop claude-plugins-official (Python • 🟢) ⭐ 33.5K → https://github.com/anthropics/claude-plugins-official… — @githubfeed.bsky.social1 likes and repost
- May 24, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/Lum1104/Understand-Anything - TypeScript, 3987 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy1 likes and repost · 3 replies
- May 23, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/Lum1104/Understand-Anything - TypeScript, 2331 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy1 likes and repost · 1 reply
- May 21, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-plugins-official - Python, 891 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy1 likes and repost · 1 reply
- May 19, 2026🔥 Hot Repo! 🔥 (100+ new stars) 📦 anthropics / claude-plugins-official ⭐ 19,816 (+127) 🗒 Python Official, Anthropic-managed directory of… — @github-trending.bsky.social1 likes and repost
- Mar 1, 2026anthropics / claude-plugins-official Official, Anthropic-managed directory of high quality Claude Code Plugins.… — @pythonhub.dev1 likes and repost
- Feb 4, 2026これはClaude Codeの機能を拡張する公式プラグイン群のディレクトリらしい 開発ワークフローの標準化や新しいAIエージェントの利用に期待できるかな yug1224 starred anthropics/claude-plugins-official… — @yug1224.com1 likes and repost
- Aug 29, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/tt-a1i/archify - JavaScript, 3927 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy0 likes and reposts · 1 reply
- Aug 29, 2026🚀 Skyrocketing! 🚀 (200+ new stars) 📦 anthropics / claude-plugins-official ⭐ 35,238 (+356) 🗒 Python Official, Anthropic-managed… — @github-trending.bsky.social0 likes and reposts · 1 reply
- Aug 28, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/tt-a1i/archify - JavaScript, 4561 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy0 likes and reposts · 1 reply
- Aug 26, 2026📈 Today's GitHub Trending: 1. https://github.com/tt-a1i/archify - HTML, 1002 stars today 2.… — @ghtrend.newsmast.social.ap.brid.gy0 likes and reposts · 1 reply
On YouTube · 17
- Oct 17, 2026Claude Plugins Official: Anthropic's Own Plugin Marketplace — Open Source Trend1k views
- Oct 24, 2026Don't use Claude Code until you install these 5 free plugins — Theo Renders1k views
- Nov 10, 2026Why you should be using the Claude Code plugin store #ai #coding #tips — Bouye | AI369 views
- Mar 15, 202665K+ Stars • AI | claude-plugins-official — Curated directory of high-quality Claude Code... #shorts — Neural-Nexus320 views
- Nov 14, 2026Claude Code Plugins: The 5 Most Installed (All Free) — Learn With Rabbany - Cloud & Cybersecurity261 views
12 more on YouTube
- Oct 18, 2026Claude Plugins — Trending on GitHub | Deal Stacks — Deal Stacks129 views
- Oct 31, 2026Best Claude Plugins for Claude Code: Anthropic's Top 7 by Installs — Prompt Vidya AI98 views
- Oct 18, 2026Claude Code Plugins: 105 Updated in 91 Minutes. Who Checks Them? — Skill MD46 views
- Nov 15, 2026Claude Code Mods: Make Your Own Animated Theme — TechUnboxed28 views
- Oct 12, 2026Claude Plugins for free! — ajc.trendingideas28 views · 1 comment
- Jul 18, 2026Claude Code Plugins & Skills Explained | Understand Custom Claude Code Plugins and Skills — ComputerMindCore18 views
- Nov 5, 20264 official Claude Code plugins, and #1 is insane. Paste into Claude Code: #Shorts — House of Claude13 views
- Nov 11, 2026Anthropic just opened an official plugin directory for Claude Code — GitHub Now8 views
- Nov 12, 2026#057 Anthropics Claude-Plugins-Official — NeuKare4 views
- Nov 12, 2026#070 Anthropics Claude-Plugins-Official — Genuine Patriot4 views
- Nov 11, 2026🚀 [Fastest Growing GitHub Repos] claude-plugins-official: The Free Tool Taking Over GitHub! #shorts — githubrepo_cloud3 views
- Jun 24, 2026anthropics/claude-plugins-official — 77 stars today on GitHub — DevTrends Daily0 views · 1 comment
On Hacker News · 1
- Apr 14, 2026Connect iMessage to your Claude Code assistant2 points
On the web · 1
- Nov 14, 2026anthropics/claude-plugins-official — GitHub trending stats ... — trendshift.io
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- aidevs-pt/devs-ai-skills★ 1same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository56 other files it gives its agents.
- accessSkill
- configureSkill
- accessSkill
- configureSkill
- accessSkill
- configureSkill
- climbSkill
- faqSkill
- hackathonSkill
- maturitySkill
- office-hoursSkill
- patternsSkill
- routinesSkill
- claude-automation-recommenderSkill
- breakdown-diagnosisSkill
- breakdown-to-next-reportSkill
- custom-connectorSkill
- customer-inquiry-intakeSkill
- daily-production-reportSkill
- data-consolidateSkill
- design-space-exploreSkill
- inspection-to-capaSkill
- morning-plant-pulseSkill
- ncr-writeupSkill
- onboardingSkill
- quote-buildSkill
- root-cause-capaSkill
- supplier-escape-to-alternate-sourceSkill
- supplier-quote-requestSkill
- trade-study-reportSkill
- claude-md-improverSkill
- claude-securitySkill
- cardputer-buddySkill
- m5-onboardSkill
- example-commandSkill
- example-skillSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- writing-hookify-rulesSkill
- math-olympiadSkill
- siegeSkill
- soloSkill
- build-mcp-appSkill
- build-mcpbSkill
- build-mcp-serverSkill
- playgroundSkill
- agent-developmentSkill
- command-developmentSkill
- hook-developmentSkill
- mcp-integrationSkill
- plugin-settingsSkill
- plugin-structureSkill
- skill-developmentSkill
- project-artifactSkill
- receiptsSkill
- session-reportSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 226
After the interval (MFG_RFQ_STALE_DAYS, the profile, or 5 business days by default, per customer-inquiry-intake) the inquiry surfaces as …
≈ “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.
Files
RFQ to Quote
Chain 1. customer-inquiry-intake → data-consolidate → design step →
quote-build.
This chain does not run in one sitting, and building it as though it does is the main way it goes wrong. Steps 1 to 5 happen when the RFQ lands. Then it pauses while the customer answers, often for days, which is usually the longest single stretch in quote turnaround. Treat the inquiry as resumable state.
Every member step runs through its member skill — load its SKILL.md before
the step, and produce what it produces. Steps 1 to 5 are
customer-inquiry-intake; step 6 is data-consolidate, backflush check
included; steps 9 to 11 are quote-build with its
../quote-build/reference/hours-ladder.md, ending in its two delimited documents. A chain
that prices from memory of its members drops exactly the rules that make the
price defensible: the ladder, the default variance threshold, the outbound
check.
Quick start
→ Steps 1-5 on arrival. Then STOP and wait for the customer
→ Step 3 can short-circuit: a hard disqualifier ends the sequence before we ask anything
→ Step 5 never waits. Provisional score on what is known
→ Answers re-enter at step 2, NOT step 5. The gaps register shrinks and step 5 re-scores
→ No answer? Stale. Never cancelled, never declined
→ Step 6 BEFORE step 7: a current-revision routing makes the design a cross-check, not the basis
→ Step 7 builds an internal model per path: C2 drawing, B prior model saved as new, A text (ROM only), C1 STEP (unverified)
→ Integrity check before and after every CAD step. The prior model is never overwritten
→ Fusion missing? Hand-entered features or no design step. Labelled, never a stop
→ Four gates: send questions, confirm bid/no-bid, confirm the design, release the quoteInputs
First, find the plant setup: from the task's own folder (never cd into the plugin), run
python3 -I <this skill's folder>/../../shared/scripts/plant_setup.py find, do its setup_page_first step, then read the profile at
profile_path and any rate at rates_path, per ../../shared/replies.md.
| Input | Source | Form |
| The RFQ and its drawings | M365 mail and attachments, a folder, or pasted | PDF, XLSX, DOCX, image, email body, STEP |
| Customer answers, when they arrive | Conversation, or a forwarded reply | Text |
| Routings and closed-job operation actuals | Through data-consolidate | Dataset v4 |
| Machining data | ### Machining data in the ## Plant context block | Config |
| Fusion, for the design step | The desktop app, with the connector | Live CAD connection |
| Everything else | Whatever the three member skills read | See each skill |
The twelve steps
1. The RFQ arrives, in whatever format the customer sent it. Hand it to
customer-inquiry-intake. A multi-attachment package is one inquiry.
2. Extract into the intake form, with missing and ambiguous flagged
separately, every tolerance carrying how it was read, and each line's
geometry_path classified — C2 drawing, C1 STEP, B prior part, A
text only, none. This is also where a customer's later answer re-enters.
3. Check against the plant's constraints. A hard disqualifier stops the sequence here with a no-bid recommendation and its specific reason, before the plant engages the customer at all. There is no point asking five questions about a part the plant cannot make.
Two limits, both load-bearing. It stops the sequence, not the inquiry: the estimator can override and proceed, and the inquiry stays open. And only violations determinable from stated facts qualify. Anything resting on a missing field is a scoring input for step 5, not a stop.
4. Draft the open questions back to the customer, as sendable email text —
including a drawing with no revision and any change the customer says is
pending. Gate 1 — the estimator sends them. Nothing goes to a customer
from here. When they say they have, record questions_sent_at and _by: the
stale clock starts there.
5. Return the provisional bid/no-bid, with its reasoning and the specific
unanswered questions that would change it, per line as well as overall: an
RFQ whose lines deserve different answers is partial, with each line's
line_recommendation. Gate 2 — the estimator confirms or declines, per line
where the lines differ, and bid_decision_basis records what they ruled on.
Step 5 never waits. Most RFQs arrive with at least one gap, so a recommendation that blocked on answers would stall the chain on nearly all of them. It sits after the questions rather than at the front because a sound call often needs those questions already in flight, but it is still ahead of every costing step.
Then the chain stops. While any drafted question is unanswered, the first pass ends here, and says so in these terms: "Paused after step 5, at Gate 1 and Gate 2 — the questions are drafted for you to send, and the bid/no-bid is provisional until you confirm it. Steps 6 to 11 run when the customer answers, or when you tell me to quote with those questions as exclusions." No customer-facing quote — no price, no lead time, no terms — is drafted in the same pass as the questions it depends on, even when the request was "take this all the way to a quote." A quote built on an open question prices a guess, and once it exists it gets sent. The estimator may still choose to quote on exclusions; that is their call at Gate 2, made after seeing the questions, not a default.
A pause is saved, so a new session can resume it. Save the intake form on
the Open work page as the contract names it, with open_questions word for
word as sent, set paused_at_step and waiting_on, and write the inquiry's line to the page's ## Open inquiries
block, per ../../shared/contracts/intake-form.md and
../../shared/replies.md. Name the page and the file on it. On resume, bring
in the page, read the line, open the form from it, and continue at
paused_at_step; never start the inquiry over.
6. Pull cost history, comparables, routings and operation actuals via
data-consolidate and the ERP, with the backflush check — load
../data-consolidate/SKILL.md; actuals agreeing within 1% are
probable_standard, all of them, not the one that happens to equal the
routing. This runs before
the design step on purpose: where a current-revision routing or trustworthy
actuals exist, the model is a cross-check, not the basis.
7. The design step. Per line, by path, build the internal estimating model
in a new Fusion document, every feature citing its source, with the
document-integrity check before and after: C2 from the drawing; B by
opening a different prior part's model, applying the drawing's changes and
saving as a new document, the prior model never overwritten, falling back to
C2 when it is unavailable; A from text specs, every dimension from_text,
a ROM only, never a firm quote; C1 by importing the STEP and reading
it, nothing generated, the import unverified. Emit the
geometry estimate, approval.status: draft, per
../../shared/contracts/geometry-estimate.md. Skipped for a line with a
current-revision routing unless the estimator asks for a cross-check. Read
reference/design-step.md before the first CAD call.
8. Gate 3 — the estimator confirms the design. The model, the tolerance
reading, the datum assumptions (every inferred datum, by name), the operation
list, and the open questions the model raised. A line priced from a current
routing still passes Gate 3 on the routing's operation list and the tolerance
reading. No geometry-derived hour is computed for the quote until this yes,
or an override the estimator gives and the record keeps.
9. The hours step, through quote-build — load ../quote-build/SKILL.md
and ../quote-build/reference/hours-ladder.md first: the CAM path where Fusion
Manufacturing and plant cutting data exist, the feature path always — setup
hours and run minutes per operation, low, expected and high, each labelled with
its basis, each toolpath verified by geometry.
10. The ladder per operation, through quote-build: routing, then
recorded actuals, then geometry-derived, then first principles; variance where
two exist; setup and run apart; capability flags; the load check by work center.
11. The customer quote and the internal sheet, as quote-build emits them:
=== CUSTOMER QUOTE — SENDABLE === and === INTERNAL COST SHEET — NOT FOR
CUSTOMER ===, each closed with === END ===, the outbound check run on the
first. Gate 4 — the estimator reviews and releases.
12. When something comes back. See Resuming, below.
Approval gates
Four, and the count matters — a reader who thinks there are three has lost the one that stops an unconfirmed model pricing a job, and a reader who thinks there are two has lost the one that stops mail reaching a customer.
| Gate | Where | What it protects |
| 1 | Step 4 | The estimator sends the questions. No mail leaves on anyone's behalf |
| 2 | Step 5 | The estimator confirms bid/no-bid. This is what makes the chain valuable rather than merely fast |
| 3 | Step 8 | The estimator confirms the model, the tolerance reading, the datum assumptions and the operation list. Hours are derived from what was confirmed, not from what was generated |
| 4 | Step 11 | The estimator releases the quote |
Nothing reaches a customer without human release. The generated model never reaches a customer at all.
Asked where sign-off is needed, answer with this table — each gate, its
step, and what the estimator does there. "All four gates are still with the
estimator" is true and tells them nothing. And whenever the chain stops, it
names the gate and the step it stopped at. What a yes at a gate does and does
not cover — including that a Gate 3 yes does not carry to a later drawing
revision — is ../../shared/approval-gates.md.
Resuming
When the answers come back
An answer is new source material. It re-enters at step 2, not step 5 — it is extracted like anything else with its own source reference, the gaps register shrinks, and step 5 re-scores on the fuller picture.
It revises the existing inquiry. It never opens a new one. When the
inquiry came from the Open work page, the reply's first line says so:
"Picking up EH-RFQ-0912 from your Open work page, paused at step 5." Match
each answer to its question by the numbers in the saved open_questions.
Where an answer flips the recommendation, say so and say why. A
recommendation that silently reverses between two readings is worse than either
version of it. And an earlier Gate 2 yes lapses: it covered the
recommendation as shown in bid_decision_basis, not the new one. Return the
decision (and the changed line's) to draft, set bid_decision_reset to what
changed, and ask Gate 2 again naming the change. Never quote a line on a yes
given before it flipped.
When a revised drawing arrives
A new drawing revision re-runs step 7 for the lines it touches: a new model, a new geometry estimate, a new Gate 3. The previous Gate 3 yes covered the previous revision and nothing else. Hours and price follow from the new confirmation.
When the customer counters on price
A price counter does not re-run step 7 and never reopens CAD. Nothing about
the part changed. quote-build re-derives from the stored operation record,
and the revision goes through Gate 4 like any other.
When they never come back
After the interval (MFG_RFQ_STALE_DAYS, the profile, or 5 business days by
default, per customer-inquiry-intake) the inquiry surfaces as stale, carrying its
provisional recommendation and its still-open questions, so the estimator
quotes it with exclusions or drops it deliberately.
A declined inquiry is never surfaced as stale: it has been decided.
Stale is a visibility change, never a status change. Nothing here cancels, declines, closes or no-bids an inquiry because a customer went quiet. Letting it go quiet is how an RFQ joins the unbid book, which is one of this chain's own metrics.
Output
Every document this skill produces is printed in the reply, in full.
Saving a copy to a file as well is fine, as Word or Excel per ../../shared/replies.md, never .txt; a file instead of the reply is not.
The person reads the reply, and every delimited block and outbound check lives
in it — a document only on disk has been neither seen nor checked.
A record handed to another skill is saved and summarised, never pasted as
raw YAML; memory blocks are written where the plant's memory lives; and the
name on an approval is asked, never taken from the account. All three per
../../shared/replies.md.
Everything the member skills produce, in order: the intake form, the open questions as sendable text, the provisional recommendation with what would change it, the geometry estimate per line (or the reason there is none), the customer-facing quote, the internal cost-basis sheet with its hours-basis table — rung, path, cutting-data basis, setup and run, range, variance and drivers per operation — and the assumptions and exclusions list.
The Sales command-center page — commercial performance for the period,
carrying the intake record and the quote by reference. An artifact you place;
nothing is written to a system. Read ../../shared/command-center.md.
Edge cases and failure modes
- A hard disqualifier fires at step 3 — the chain stops before step 4. The inquiry stays open and the estimator may override.
- The estimator declines at Gate 2 —
quote-buildblocks. Reopening is a new decision, not a quote. - The estimator declines the model at Gate 3 — no geometry-derived hours. Correct the model and re-confirm, or price from the rungs that remain.
- A revised RFQ arrives mid-chain — it supersedes, and the chain resumes against the revision rather than running twice.
- The customer answers only some questions — re-score on what arrived, and keep the rest open. Partial is normal.
- The only routing is for an earlier revision — superseded. Step 7 runs as though there were no routing, and the old routing is shown, never priced.
- Foreign geometry appears in the Fusion document — the step fails. Ask the user to restart Fusion. Never build on top of it.
- Asked to update the prior part's model in place (path B) — decline in one line. The adapted model is always a new document.
- Asked to send a path A line as a firm quote — decline. A firm quote needs a drawing, and the drawing re-runs step 7.
- The model suggests a cheaper way to make the part — it goes in
cost_down_proposals, on the internal sheet. Never to the customer.
Degradation
| Not available | What happens |
| The ERP (NetSuite or Infor M3) | Steps 5 and 6 both degrade to document-based comparables, and the chain says so rather than quietly producing weaker output |
| The capability profile | Step 3 cannot run its constraint check. Say so; do not report a clean check that never happened |
| M365 | Accept the RFQ pasted or uploaded. The chain is otherwise unchanged |
| Fusion | The chain still completes. Step 7 offers a hand-entered feature list — prefilled from the drawing as read, every row cited, origin: hand_entered — for the estimator to confirm at Gate 3. Without it, step 7 is skipped and the ladder starts at whatever rung exists, down to first principles, labelled. Say "Fusion not connected — no model built" on the internal sheet |
| Fusion Manufacturing (CAM) | Feature path only, and the label says so |
| Plant cutting data | The CAM path runs on library feeds, labelled fusion_default, rung 4 |
| Routings and actuals | Tabs named missing. The ladder starts at rung 3 |
| A prior part model (path B) | Falls back to C2, built from the drawing in a new document, and says so with the reason. The prior model is never written to |
| CAD, on a STEP file with no drawing (path C1) | "C1: STEP read without CAD (unverified)" — the STEP read as a text file, every value cited and labelled unverified. Else a hand-entered feature list, else skip step 7, labelled |
| A drawing (path A, text specs only) | Built from the text, every dimension from_text. A ROM, never a firm quote — budgetary on the customer document, and nothing about how it was estimated |
| Foreign geometry in the document | Step 7 fails for that line. The user restarts Fusion |
Chain position
This is Chain 1 itself. Members: customer-inquiry-intake,
data-consolidate, quote-build, with the design step run here.
Metric. Quote turnaround, owned jointly by customer-inquiry-intake and
quote-build. Hit rate and the unbid book, owned by quote-build.
Reference files
| File | Load when |
../customer-inquiry-intake/SKILL.md | Steps 1 to 5 and 2-on-return |
../data-consolidate/SKILL.md | Step 6 — routings, actuals and the backflush check |
reference/design-step.md | Steps 7 and 8 — the paths, the build, the integrity check and Gate 3 |
../design-space-explore/reference/cad-adapter.md | Step 7, before the first Fusion call — the create-from-scratch, save-as-new and STEP import calls, and the connector behaviors that break them |
../design-space-explore/reference/adapt-prior-model.md | Step 7, path B — open the prior model, apply, save as new, never overwrite |
../quote-build/SKILL.md | Steps 9 to 11 |
../../shared/contracts/intake-form.md | The handoff, including geometry_path, bid_decision_state and inquiry_state |
../../shared/contracts/geometry-estimate.md | Step 7's output and what Gate 3 moves |
../../shared/command-center.md | The Sales page, and why it is never a write |
../../shared/approval-gates.md | At every gate — what a yes covers, and how to say where the chain stopped |
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
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.

