@raishin/vanguard-frontier-agentic 2.10.0 → 2.13.0

package/skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+---
+name: sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review
+description: Review SAP manufacturing execution risk across SAP PP (Production Planning), S/4HANA Manufacturing, and Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES): production order governance, capacity planning and scheduling controls, MRP exception management, shop-floor integration quality, quality management integration controls, backflush and goods movement governance, and manufacturing execution exceptions. Flags control gaps in production order authorization, uncontrolled backflush paths, MRP exception backlogs, quality integration bypass risks, and shop-floor traceability failures. Does not release production orders, post goods movements, confirm operations, or mutate any live manufacturing or MES system.
+allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob WebSearch WebFetch
+metadata:
+  author: "github: Raishin"
+  version: "0.1.0"
+  updated: "2026-06-19"
+  category: operational
+  lifecycle: experimental
+---
+
+# SAP Manufacturing Execution Risk Review
+
+## Purpose
+
+Assess the execution risk, configuration posture, and control coverage of SAP manufacturing processes spanning SAP PP (Production Planning and Control), SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, and SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES). Evaluate production order governance by reviewing production order document type design, order type parameter configuration, scheduling parameters, production scheduler authorization, order release controls, and whether production orders can be released, confirmed, or closed without required upstream material availability, routing completion, or quality inspection results. Assess capacity planning and scheduling controls by reviewing work center capacity configuration, scheduling mode selection (finite vs. infinite scheduling), capacity leveling governance, and whether overloaded work centers trigger escalation workflows or allow unrestricted scheduling beyond physical capacity. Review MRP exception management by assessing MRP type configuration, planning horizon design, exception message categorization (excess stock, requirement shortages, rescheduling proposals), exception monitoring and resolution governance, and whether unresolved MRP exception backlogs represent procurement, production, or inventory accuracy risks that propagate to downstream procurement and fulfillment processes. Evaluate shop-floor integration quality by reviewing the integration between SAP PP production orders and SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES) shop-floor execution: order release and download to MES, operation confirmation feedback from MES to SAP, material consumption confirmation, goods movement integration, and whether shop-floor integration failures create production order status inaccuracies or inventory discrepancies in S/4HANA. Assess quality management integration controls by reviewing inspection lot creation configuration (at goods receipt, production order goods receipt, in-process inspection), inspection plan assignment, quality notification routing, usage decision authorization, and whether quality holds can be bypassed to release non-conforming materials into production or shipping without a quality management approval. Review backflush and goods movement governance by assessing automatic goods receipt (backflush) configuration, milestone confirmation design, component issue methods (manual 261 vs. automatic 261 via backflush), goods movement authorization controls, and whether backflush processes allow uncontrolled component consumption postings without physical verification. Evaluate manufacturing execution exception handling by reviewing production order exception categories (material shortage, capacity overload, operation delay, quality hold), exception escalation workflow design, and whether manufacturing exceptions are tracked, routed, and resolved within target production cycle times. Does not connect to or mutate any live SAP PP, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES), or SAP Quality Management system. Never releases production orders, confirms operations, posts goods movements, modifies routing or bill of materials records, or issues usage decisions.
+
+## When to use
+
+Use this skill when the user asks to:
+
+- review SAP PP production order governance: production order document type and order type parameter configuration, scheduling type and scheduling margin key design, order release control (availability check at order release, missing parts list), production order confirmation controls (goods receipt at order confirmation, automatic goods issue, milestone confirmation), and whether production orders can be released or confirmed without completed availability checks or required upstream quality inspection results,
+- assess SAP S/4HANA capacity planning and scheduling controls: work center capacity configuration (available capacity version, shift definitions, capacity utilization), scheduling mode selection (finite scheduling vs. infinite scheduling), capacity leveling governance (strategy profile, leveling horizon), and whether overloaded work centers create unrestricted production scheduling beyond physical capacity without triggering escalation or rescheduling workflows,
+- evaluate SAP MRP exception management: MRP type configuration (MRP type PD, VB, MRP with time-phased planning), planning horizon and firming horizon design, exception message monitoring and categorization (20: reschedule in, 30: reschedule out, 10: bring forward, 50: increase quantity, 60: cancel), exception resolution governance, and whether unresolved MRP exception backlogs represent material shortage, over-procurement, or inventory accuracy risks that are not being systematically resolved,
+- review SAP PP to SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES) shop-floor integration: production order release and download to MES, operation confirmation feedback from MES to SAP PP (PPPI/ODATA/IDoc), material consumption and component issue confirmation, goods movement integration (GR against production order), integration error monitoring and reprocessing governance, and whether shop-floor integration failures create production order status inaccuracies or inventory valuation discrepancies in the S/4HANA material ledger,
+- assess SAP Quality Management (QM) integration controls: inspection lot creation configuration (inspection types 01 goods receipt from production, 03 goods receipt from external vendor, 04 in-process inspection, 08 goods receipt for production order), inspection plan assignment and operation coverage, quality notification creation and routing governance, usage decision authorization (UD code assignment, acceptance and rejection), stock transfer to unrestricted use after UD, and whether quality holds can be bypassed to release non-conforming or uninspected materials into production or outbound delivery without a qualified quality management approver,
+- review backflush and goods movement governance: automatic goods receipt (backflush) configuration in production order type parameters, component backflush (item-level flush setting for BOM components), milestone confirmation design (which operations trigger material flush), goods movement authorization objects (MB_MIGO_GR, MB_MIGO_GI), and whether the backflush process allows material consumption postings to be created without physical count verification or scanner-based confirmation,
+- evaluate manufacturing execution exception handling: production order exception category design (material shortage, capacity overload, operation delay, quality hold, missing components), exception prioritization and escalation workflow, integration with SAP QM quality notifications for quality-related exceptions, MRP shortfall exception routing to procurement, and whether manufacturing exceptions are tracked, prioritized, and resolved within target production cycle times,
+- identify manufacturing execution SoD exposures: combined authority over production order release and goods movement confirmation; combined authority over BOM and routing modification and production order creation; combined authority over quality usage decision and stock transfer to unrestricted use; combined authority over MRP planning run execution and production order creation in the same planning plant.
+
+## When not to use
+
+- When the user needs live inspection of open production orders, operation confirmation logs, inventory movements, or MRP exception lists — this skill accepts only user-provided configuration summaries, production order status reports, MRP exception aging reports, QM inspection lot summaries, integration status reports, or written descriptions of the manufacturing execution landscape.
+- When the request concerns SAP Integrated Business Planning (IBP) demand planning or supply network planning without a production order execution angle — use `sap-supply-chain-ibp-resilience-review` for IBP planning controls.
+- When the request is specifically about SAP Plant Maintenance (PM) or SAP Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) maintenance order execution rather than production order manufacturing execution — plant maintenance work orders and production orders share some configuration concepts but are distinct process areas.
+- When the request is about SAP QM standalone quality inspection without a manufacturing integration angle — standalone QM assessments for goods receipt inspection or vendor quality management are out of scope here; this skill focuses on QM controls as they integrate with manufacturing execution.
+- When the request is specifically about SAP GRC Access Control ruleset design for PP or QM transaction codes — use `sap-security-iam-grc-sod-review` for GRC ruleset assessment; this skill identifies manufacturing SoD exposures in process terms rather than reviewing the GRC system itself.
+
+## Does not touch live systems
+
+This skill operates on user-provided configuration descriptions, production order status reports, MRP exception aging reports, capacity utilization summaries, QM inspection lot reports, shop-floor integration status exports, backflush configuration summaries, or written descriptions of the manufacturing execution landscape. It does not connect to any SAP PP system, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing system, SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES) system, SAP QM system, Fiori launchpad, SAP GUI session, or backend RFC. It does not release, modify, confirm, or close production orders. It does not post goods movements, adjust component consumption, issue materials, confirm routing operations, process quality usage decisions, modify bill of materials or routing records, or execute MRP planning runs.
+
+**This skill never releases production orders or posts goods movements.** No production order release (CO02, CO01), no operation confirmation (CO11N, CO15), no goods receipt against production order (MIGO, MB31), no component issue (MIGO movement type 261), no backflush trigger, no quality usage decision (QA11), no BOM or routing modification (CS02, CA02), and no MRP planning run (MD01, MD02) is performed or recommended as a direct action in this skill's execution path. All remediation recommendations describe configuration and process design changes to be implemented and tested in a non-production environment.
+
+## Lean operating rules
+
+- Classify manufacturing execution control findings before recommending. Every finding must be assigned to a manufacturing control domain (production order governance / capacity planning and scheduling / MRP exception management / shop-floor integration / QM integration / backflush and goods movement / manufacturing exceptions / manufacturing SoD) before a remediation path is proposed.
+- Quality hold bypass is a first-order product quality and compliance risk. Any configuration that allows a material to be transferred from quality inspection stock to unrestricted use without an authorized quality usage decision is a `critical` finding in regulated industries and a `high` finding in all others. Escalate before other remediation in regulated environments (pharmaceuticals, food, medical devices, aerospace).
+- Uncontrolled backflush creates invisible inventory inaccuracy. A backflush configuration that flushes component consumption at milestone confirmation without physical count verification creates a material consumption discrepancy risk. Classify combined backflush authority and goods movement adjustment authority as a `high` SoD finding.
+- MRP exception backlogs signal systemic planning failures. Unresolved MRP exception messages above a defined threshold — especially exception 30 (reschedule out, surplus inventory) and exception 60 (cancel, excess planned order) — represent over-procurement risk. Unresolved exception 10 (bring forward) and exception 20 (reschedule in) represent production schedule risk. Both require systematic exception resolution governance.
+- Shop-floor integration errors create invisible production order status gaps. Any DM/MES-to-SAP-PP integration error that leaves a production order in an incorrect status (released but not confirmed in SAP when the actual operation is complete on the shop floor) causes inventory inaccuracy and delivery performance measurement failures.
+- Production order release without availability check creates downstream shortage risk. A production order released without a completed availability check (missing parts list review) creates a material shortage risk on the shop floor — components may not be available when the production order reaches the relevant operation.
+- Evidence from user-provided artifacts or official SAP PP, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, SAP Digital Manufacturing, and SAP QM documentation takes precedence over inference.
+- Load only the reference needed for the manufacturing control domain under review.
+
+## Evidence rules
+
+Label all claims with one of:
+
+- `documentation-based` — grounded in SAP Production Planning and Control, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES), SAP Quality Management, or SAP Help Portal PP/QM documentation
+- `user-provided evidence` — production order status reports, MRP exception aging reports, capacity utilization summaries, QM inspection lot reports, shop-floor integration status exports, backflush configuration summaries, or written descriptions provided by the user
+- `inference` — derived reasoning not directly confirmed by official docs or user evidence
+
+## Live-environment rules
+
+**This skill does not touch live systems.** There is no SAP PP RFC call, SAP Digital Manufacturing API invocation, SAP QM OData call, Fiori launchpad session, SAP GUI session, BAPI execution, or direct database query in this skill's execution path. Users must supply configuration summaries, production order status reports, MRP exception data, capacity utilization reports, QM inspection lot summaries, shop-floor integration status exports, or written descriptions of their manufacturing execution landscape for this skill to review.
+
+**This skill never releases production orders or posts goods movements.** Recommendations describing remediation always apply to configuration, authorization, or process design — not to direct production order release, operation confirmation, goods movement posting, quality usage decision, BOM or routing modification, or MRP planning run execution.
+
+## References
+
+Load only when needed:
+
+- [Workflow and output contract](references/workflow-and-output.md) — manufacturing execution control finding taxonomy, severity assignment, output format.
+- [Safety checklist](references/safety-checklist.md) — non-negotiables, common manufacturing control review mistakes, when to push back.
+- [Official sources](references/official-sources.md) — SAP PP, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, SAP Digital Manufacturing, SAP QM, and MRP documentation.
+
+## Response minimum
+
+Return, at minimum:
+
+- **Problem classification**: manufacturing execution control domain(s) affected (production order governance / capacity planning and scheduling / MRP exception management / shop-floor integration / QM integration / backflush and goods movement / manufacturing exceptions / manufacturing SoD) and specific finding(s) per domain.
+- **Evidence used**: documentation-based / user-provided evidence / inference.
+- **Risk level**: critical (quality hold bypass in a regulated manufacturing environment enabling non-conforming product release; undetected production order release path bypassing all controls in GMP-regulated production) / high (quality usage decision authority without dual-control in regulated environments; backflush SoD gap enabling undetected component consumption manipulation; shop-floor integration error without alerting; production order release without availability check; BOM modification and production order creation combined authority) / medium (MRP exception backlog above resolution threshold; capacity scheduling beyond physical capacity without escalation; milestone confirmation not aligned with actual shop-floor operations; QM inspection lot assignment gap for a production operation type) / low (best practice deviation in order type parameter design or scheduling margin key configuration).
+- **Recommended action**: specific configuration or process remediation per finding (QM usage decision dual-control implementation, quality hold bypass closure, backflush SoD role separation, shop-floor integration error alerting, availability check enforcement at order release, MRP exception resolution governance, capacity leveling strategy update, inspection lot type assignment correction, manufacturing exception escalation workflow addition, etc.).
+- **Refusal / escalation triggers**: if a quality hold bypass in a regulated manufacturing environment (GMP, ISO, AS9100, FDA 21 CFR Part 11) is found, escalate to the quality manager, regulatory affairs team, and internal audit team before any further production or shipment occurs. If a finding requires live SAP PP, DM/MES, or QM system inspection, state that clearly and ask the user to supply the relevant configuration export or description.
+- **Business impact**: product quality and regulatory compliance risk (GMP, FDA, ISO), non-conforming product release risk, inventory accuracy and valuation impact from backflush and goods movement control gaps, production schedule adherence risk from capacity and MRP control failures, shop-floor traceability failure risk, customer delivery performance impact from unresolved manufacturing exceptions, audit finding risk for manufacturing execution controls.
+- **Next verification step**: confirm recommended configuration changes against the user's current SAP PP, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, SAP Digital Manufacturing, and SAP QM setup in a non-production system before promoting to production.

package/skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "SAP Manufacturing Execution Risk Review"
+  short_description: "Review SAP manufacturing execution risk across SAP PP, S/4HANA Manufacturing, and Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES): production order governance, capacity planning and scheduling controls, MRP exception management, shop-floor integration quality, quality management integration controls, backflush and goods movement governance, and manufacturing execution exceptions. Does not release production orders, post goods movements, confirm operations, or access live manufacturing or MES systems."
+  default_prompt: "Use $sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review to assess the provided SAP manufacturing execution control configuration. Classify each finding by manufacturing execution control domain (production order governance, capacity planning and scheduling, MRP exception management, shop-floor integration, QM integration, backflush and goods movement, manufacturing exceptions, manufacturing SoD), assign a risk level (critical/high/medium/low), and recommend specific remediation actions. Flag any quality hold bypass in a regulated manufacturing environment for immediate escalation to the quality manager and regulatory affairs team. State evidence level (documentation-based, user-provided, inference) and confirm that no live SAP PP, DM/MES, or QM system access, production order release, goods movement posting, or quality usage decision is required or performed."
+dependencies:
+  tools:
+    - type: "web"
+      value: "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/production-planning-and-control"
+      description: "SAP Production Planning and Control documentation — primary reference for production order governance and MRP controls review"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: true

package/skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+{
+  "id": "sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review",
+  "name": "SAP Manufacturing Execution Risk Review",
+  "type": "skill",
+  "provider": "sap",
+  "harnesses": [
+    "claude-code",
+    "codex",
+    "cursor",
+    "gemini",
+    "kiro",
+    "other"
+  ],
+  "summary": "Review SAP manufacturing execution risk across SAP PP, S/4HANA Manufacturing, and Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES): production order governance, capacity planning and scheduling controls, MRP exception management, shop-floor integration quality, quality management integration controls, backflush and goods movement governance, and manufacturing execution exceptions. Does not release production orders, post goods movements, confirm operations, or access live manufacturing or MES systems.",
+  "source_type": "original",
+  "category": "operational",
+  "official_docs": [
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/production-planning-and-control",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/capacity-planning",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/material-requirements-planning",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_DIGITAL_MANUFACTURING/digital-manufacturing/integration-with-sap-s4hana",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-quality-management/quality-management-in-production",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/backflush-and-goods-movements",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-quality-management/usage-decision-and-stock-posting"
+  ],
+  "security_notes": "Does not access live SAP PP systems, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing systems, SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES) systems, SAP QM systems, Fiori launchpads, SAP GUI sessions, or any production manufacturing or MES database. Accepts only user-provided configuration exports, production order status reports, MRP exception aging reports, capacity utilization summaries, QM inspection lot reports, shop-floor integration status exports, or written descriptions of the manufacturing execution landscape. Never request or accept SAP logon credentials, RFC connection details, DM/MES API credentials, or direct manufacturing database access. Never releases production orders, confirms operations, posts goods movements, processes quality usage decisions, or modifies BOM or routing records. Quality hold bypass findings in regulated manufacturing environments must be escalated to the quality manager, regulatory affairs team, and internal audit team immediately.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-06-19",
+  "path": "skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review",
+  "author": "github: Raishin",
+  "version": "0.1.0",
+  "lifecycle": "experimental"
+}

package/skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review/references/official-sources.md

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# Official sources — SAP Manufacturing Execution Risk Review
+
+Use this reference when grounding production order governance assessment, capacity planning and scheduling control review, MRP exception management analysis, shop-floor integration quality evaluation, quality management integration control assessment, backflush and goods movement governance review, and manufacturing SoD classification.
+
+**Evidence level**: documentation-based (SAP Help Portal, SAP Production Planning documentation, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing documentation, SAP Digital Manufacturing documentation, SAP Quality Management documentation). No live-system evidence is collected by this skill.
+
+## SAP PP production order governance
+
+- SAP Production Planning and Control — Production Orders (On-Premise)
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/production-planning-and-control
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: Production order document type and order type parameter configuration, scheduling parameter design, order release controls (availability check at release, missing parts list), milestone confirmation design, automatic goods receipt at order confirmation, goods issue control, and production order authorization objects in SAP S/4HANA On-Premise
+  why_needed: Primary reference for production order governance assessment — defines the order type parameter, release control, and confirmation model used to classify production order authorization and release control findings
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## SAP PP capacity planning and scheduling
+
+- SAP Production Planning — Capacity Planning (On-Premise)
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/capacity-planning
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: Work center capacity configuration (available capacity versions, shift definitions, capacity utilization), scheduling mode selection (finite scheduling, infinite scheduling), capacity leveling strategy profile design, leveling horizon, and capacity overload escalation in SAP S/4HANA On-Premise
+  why_needed: Authoritative reference for capacity planning and scheduling control assessment — defines the work center capacity model, scheduling mode, and leveling strategy used to classify overloaded work center and unrestricted scheduling findings
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## SAP MRP exception management
+
+- SAP MRP — Exception Messages and Planning (On-Premise)
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/material-requirements-planning
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: MRP type configuration (MRP type PD, VB, time-phased planning), planning horizon and firming horizon design, exception message categorization (10: bring forward, 20: reschedule in, 30: reschedule out, 50: increase quantity, 60: cancel process), MRP exception monitoring, and exception resolution governance in SAP S/4HANA On-Premise
+  why_needed: Defines the MRP exception message model and planning horizon design — required to classify unresolved exception backlogs, over-procurement risk, and material shortage findings
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES) shop-floor integration
+
+- SAP Digital Manufacturing — Integration with SAP S/4HANA
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_DIGITAL_MANUFACTURING/digital-manufacturing/integration-with-sap-s4hana
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: Production order release and download to SAP Digital Manufacturing (MES), operation confirmation feedback from MES to SAP PP (OData/IDoc), material consumption and component issue confirmation, goods movement integration (GR against production order), and integration error monitoring and reprocessing in SAP Digital Manufacturing
+  why_needed: Primary reference for DM/MES-to-SAP-PP shop-floor integration quality assessment — defines the order download, confirmation feedback, and goods movement integration model used to classify shop-floor integration failures and production order status gap findings
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## SAP Quality Management integration with PP
+
+- SAP Quality Management — Integration with Production (On-Premise)
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-quality-management/quality-management-in-production
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: Inspection lot creation configuration (inspection types 01, 03, 04, 08), inspection plan assignment and operation coverage, quality notification creation and routing, usage decision authorization (UD code, acceptance and rejection decisions), stock transfer from quality inspection to unrestricted use, and quality hold governance in SAP S/4HANA On-Premise
+  why_needed: Authoritative reference for QM integration control assessment — defines the inspection lot, usage decision, and quality hold model used to classify quality hold bypass findings and usage decision authorization gaps
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## SAP PP backflush and goods movement configuration
+
+- SAP Production Planning — Backflushing and Goods Movements (On-Premise)
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-manufacturing/backflush-and-goods-movements
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: Automatic goods receipt (backflush) configuration in production order type parameters, component backflush (BOM item-level flush setting), milestone confirmation and component issue design, movement type 261 (goods issue for production order) and 101 (goods receipt against production order) authorization, and goods movement control in SAP S/4HANA On-Premise
+  why_needed: Defines the backflush and goods movement control model for manufacturing — required to classify uncontrolled component consumption, backflush SoD gaps, and phantom goods movement findings
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## SAP Quality Management — usage decision and regulated environments
+
+- SAP Quality Management — Usage Decision and Stock Posting (On-Premise)
+  https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_S4HANA_ON-PREMISE/s4hana-quality-management/usage-decision-and-stock-posting
+  source_owner: SAP SE
+  topic_supported: Usage decision configuration (UD code assignment, automatic and manual usage decisions, follow-on functions), stock posting after usage decision (transfer to unrestricted use, blocked stock, returns), GMP and regulated industry requirements for electronic records and electronic signatures (FDA 21 CFR Part 11 context) in SAP QM, and dual-control for usage decision in regulated manufacturing
+  why_needed: Defines the usage decision and stock posting control model — required to classify quality hold bypass findings, dual-control gaps in regulated manufacturing environments, and unauthorized release of non-conforming materials
+  evidence_level: primary
+  last_verified: 2026-06-19
+
+## Grounding rule
+
+SAP Help Portal and S/4HANA Manufacturing documentation describe the designed control model and configuration options for production order governance, MRP, capacity planning, shop-floor integration, QM integration, and backflush. They do not prove what order type parameters are active in the user's system, whether availability checks are enforced at order release, whether inspection lots are being created for the relevant operations, whether DM/MES integration errors are being monitored, or whether backflush authorization is separated from goods movement adjustment authority. Users must supply production order status reports, MRP exception aging data, capacity utilization summaries, QM inspection lot reports, shop-floor integration status exports, backflush configuration summaries, or written descriptions of their manufacturing execution landscape for concrete assessment.

package/skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review/references/safety-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+# Safety checklist — SAP Manufacturing Execution Risk Review
+
+Use before making any manufacturing execution control remediation recommendation, especially for findings involving quality hold governance, backflush controls, DM/MES integration, or regulated manufacturing environments (GMP, FDA, ISO, AS9100).
+
+## Non-negotiables
+
+- Do not access, connect to, or request access to any live SAP PP system, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing system, SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES) system, SAP QM system, Fiori launchpad, SAP GUI session, backend RFC, or production manufacturing or MES database. This skill reviews artifacts only.
+- Do not accept or request SAP logon credentials, RFC connection details, DM/MES API credentials, quality management system access, or direct manufacturing database connectivity.
+- Do not release, modify, confirm, or close production orders. Do not post goods movements, adjust component consumption, issue materials, confirm routing operations, process quality usage decisions, or modify bill of materials or routing records. There is no production order release (CO02, CO01), no operation confirmation (CO11N, CO15), no MIGO goods movement, no component issue (movement type 261), no backflush trigger, no quality usage decision (QA11), no BOM modification (CS02), and no routing modification (CA02) in this skill's execution path. Recommendations always describe configuration and process design changes, not direct manufacturing actions.
+- Do not approve, close, or recommend closing an unmitigated critical quality hold bypass finding in a regulated manufacturing environment. Only the quality manager and regulatory affairs team with appropriate authority can accept a product quality risk. State this explicitly when critical quality findings are identified. Do not authorize shipment or production continuation for affected lots without quality management sign-off.
+- Do not recommend implementing configuration changes (order type parameter modifications, inspection type assignment changes, backflush configuration, MRP type changes) directly in a production SAP PP or QM system. All recommendations must first be tested in a development or quality system.
+- Do not use memory alone to assert whether a specific manufacturing operation requires a quality inspection under GMP, FDA 21 CFR, ISO 13485, or AS9100. Quality inspection requirements must be grounded in user-provided quality plans, inspection type assignments, or regulatory compliance documentation.
+- Do not assert that a backflush configuration is controlled without confirming that the authorization separation between goods movement posting and inventory quantity adjustment is verified in user-provided role exports.
+
+## What people get wrong
+
+- **Treating availability check at order release as a hard stop by default**: SAP PP availability check at production order release can be configured as a warning-only message rather than a hard stop. If the availability check result is a warning that allows the planner to override and release the order anyway, the control is effectively advisory, not enforcing. Verify whether the availability check result is a hard stop or an overridable warning.
+- **Conflating backflush control with physical verification**: Automatic backflush at milestone confirmation posts component consumption based on BOM quantities, not actual physical counts. If actual consumption differs from the BOM quantity (scrap, yield loss, substitution), the inventory posting does not reflect reality. Backflush is not equivalent to a physically verified goods issue.
+- **Overlooking inspection lot creation gaps for in-process inspection**: Inspection type 04 (in-process inspection) requires both the inspection type to be active in the material master QM view and the relevant production routing operation to be flagged for inspection. If the material master has inspection type 04 active but the routing operations are not flagged, no inspection lots are generated during production execution — the in-process quality control is silently missing.
+- **Assuming DM/MES integration is clean because production orders appear complete in SAP**: SAP PP production orders can be marked as technically complete (TECO) by a planner even when DM/MES operation confirmations are missing or integration errors have occurred. A TECO status does not prove that all DM/MES confirmations were received and posted correctly in S/4HANA.
+- **Missing MRP horizon firming zone impact on procurement**: The MRP firming horizon determines the boundary within which planned orders are protected from automatic rescheduling. If the firming horizon is too short relative to the supplier lead time, MRP will generate rescheduling proposals that conflict with open purchase orders — creating procurement confusion and potential over-ordering. Firming horizon design is a procurement control, not just a planning preference.
+- **Overlooking quality notification closure as a prerequisite for production order completion**: In some manufacturing quality processes, open quality notifications (defect reports, non-conformance reports) should block production order completion until resolved. If production orders can be technically completed (TECO) while open quality notifications referencing those orders remain unresolved, the quality issue may not be formally closed before the order is archived.
+- **Ignoring regulated environment requirements for electronic signatures on usage decisions**: FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and similar regulations require electronic records and electronic signatures for quality-critical decisions in pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturing. A quality usage decision in SAP QM that does not meet electronic signature requirements in a regulated environment is a regulatory finding, not merely a best practice gap.
+
+## When to push back
+
+- Push back (and escalate immediately) when a quality hold bypass is found in a regulated manufacturing environment (GMP, FDA 21 CFR Part 11, ISO 13485, AS9100) — do not proceed with other recommendations until this is escalated to the quality manager, regulatory affairs team, and internal audit team. Affected lots must be reviewed before release.
+- Push back when the user asks to confirm manufacturing control compliance from memory alone without providing configuration exports, production order status reports, MRP exception data, or QM inspection lot summaries.
+- Push back when the request requires live SAP PP, DM/MES, or QM system access (SAP GUI session, RFC call, Fiori OData API, direct manufacturing database query) — state clearly that live inspection is out of scope and ask the user to supply the relevant exports or summaries.
+- Push back when asked to release production orders, confirm operations, post goods movements, process quality usage decisions, or modify BOM or routing records — this is an absolute boundary and must be refused in all circumstances.
+- Push back when asked to approve or close a manufacturing audit finding or quality non-conformance without quality management and audit team authorization — this skill is advisory only.
+- Push back when DM/MES integration errors are identified but the user cannot provide integration monitor status reports or production order reconciliation data — do not accept that DM/MES integration is clean without evidence.
+- Push back when a regulated environment quality bypass finding is identified and the user requests an assessment of compliance status — regulatory compliance determination requires direct engagement with the quality management and regulatory affairs team, not an advisory-only review.
+
+## Evidence labels
+
+- `documentation-based` — grounded in SAP Production Planning and Control, SAP S/4HANA Manufacturing, SAP Digital Manufacturing (DM/MES), SAP Quality Management, or SAP Help Portal PP/QM documentation
+- `user-provided evidence` — production order status reports, MRP exception aging reports, capacity utilization summaries, QM inspection lot reports, DM/MES integration status exports, backflush configuration summaries, BOM and routing change logs, or written descriptions provided by the user
+- `inference` — derived reasoning not directly confirmed by official docs or user evidence; must always be labeled as such

package/skills/sap/sap-manufacturing-execution-risk-review/references/workflow-and-output.md

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+# Workflow and output contract — SAP Manufacturing Execution Risk Review
+
+Use this reference for all manufacturing execution control finding classification, risk level assignment, remediation path selection, and output formatting.
+
+## Manufacturing execution control finding taxonomy
+
+| Domain | Finding class | Description |
+|--------|--------------|-------------|
+| `production-order-governance` | `order-release-no-availability-check` | Production order released without a completed availability check (missing parts list review), creating a material shortage risk at the relevant production operation |
+| `production-order-governance` | `order-confirmation-bypass` | Production order operation can be confirmed without completing required upstream operations or without quality inspection results for in-process inspection operations |
+| `production-order-governance` | `order-release-sod-gap` | The same user or role can both create and release production orders without a scheduling or production planning supervisor review step |
+| `capacity-planning-scheduling` | `infinite-scheduling-unconstrained` | Production orders are scheduled using infinite scheduling with no capacity leveling governance, allowing unrestricted scheduling beyond physical work center capacity without escalation |
+| `capacity-planning-scheduling` | `capacity-overload-no-escalation` | Work center capacity overload does not trigger an escalation workflow or rescheduling proposal — production schedule cannot be physically executed as planned |
+| `capacity-planning-scheduling` | `available-capacity-misconfigured` | Work center available capacity is not configured to reflect actual shift patterns and planned maintenance downtimes — capacity utilization reporting is unreliable |
+| `mrp-exception-management` | `exception-backlog-reschedule-out` | High volume of unresolved exception message 30 (reschedule out) or 60 (cancel) — indicates excess planned orders or procurement proposals that will result in over-procurement or excess inventory |
+| `mrp-exception-management` | `exception-backlog-shortage` | High volume of unresolved exception message 10 (bring forward) or 20 (reschedule in) — indicates production schedule or material availability risk that will impact customer delivery |
+| `mrp-exception-management` | `mrp-horizon-design-gap` | MRP planning horizon or firming horizon is not aligned with the production lead time or supplier lead time — generates unreliable procurement proposals or freezes planned orders prematurely |
+| `shop-floor-integration` | `dm-mes-integration-error-no-alert` | SAP Digital Manufacturing-to-SAP PP integration errors are not monitored with automated alerting — production order status in SAP does not reflect actual shop-floor execution state |
+| `shop-floor-integration` | `operation-confirmation-status-gap` | DM/MES operation confirmation does not update the SAP PP production order operation status in real time — goods movement postings and order completion status are delayed or incorrect |
+| `shop-floor-integration` | `goods-movement-integration-failure` | DM/MES-triggered goods receipt or component consumption posting fails to reach the S/4HANA material ledger — creates inventory valuation discrepancy |
+| `qm-integration` | `quality-hold-bypass` | Quality inspection stock can be transferred to unrestricted use without a completed quality usage decision from an authorized QM user — non-conforming material can enter production or shipment without quality management approval |
+| `qm-integration` | `inspection-lot-missing` | Inspection lots are not being created for a production operation where in-process or goods receipt inspection is required by the quality plan or regulatory requirement |
+| `qm-integration` | `usage-decision-no-dual-control` | Quality usage decision in a regulated manufacturing environment (GMP, FDA 21 CFR Part 11, ISO 13485) does not require dual-control or electronic signature — single user can accept non-conforming material |
+| `backflush-goods-movement` | `backflush-sod-gap` | User or role has combined authority to trigger backflush (component consumption posting) and to perform inventory quantity adjustments — enables undetected component consumption manipulation |
+| `backflush-goods-movement` | `backflush-no-physical-verification` | Backflush at milestone confirmation posts component consumption without physical count or scanner verification — creates phantom goods issue risk when actual consumption differs from BOM quantity |
+| `backflush-goods-movement` | `goods-movement-authorization-gap` | Movement type 261 (goods issue for production order) or 101 (goods receipt against production order) can be posted by users without a production order context — enables unauthorized inventory movements |
+| `manufacturing-exceptions` | `exception-resolution-backlog` | Manufacturing exceptions (material shortage, capacity overload, quality hold, operation delay) are not categorized, escalated, and resolved within target production cycle times |
+| `manufacturing-exceptions` | `quality-notification-routing-gap` | Quality notifications created from manufacturing exceptions are not routed to the quality management team with a defined response time target — quality issues remain unresolved on the shop floor |
+| `manufacturing-sod` | `bom-routing-modification-order-creation-combined` | User or role has combined authority to modify bill of materials or routing records and create production orders referencing those records — enables undetected production quantity or component manipulation |
+| `manufacturing-sod` | `usage-decision-stock-transfer-combined` | User or role has combined authority to process quality usage decisions and post the resulting stock transfer from quality inspection to unrestricted use — full quality hold bypass path |
+
+## Risk level assignment
+
+| Risk level | Criteria |
+|-----------|---------|
+| `critical` | Quality hold bypass in a regulated manufacturing environment (GMP, FDA 21 CFR, ISO 13485, AS9100) enabling non-conforming product release; usage decision dual-control gap in a regulated environment with electronic records requirements |
+| `high` | Quality hold bypass in a non-regulated environment; backflush SoD gap enabling undetected component consumption manipulation; DM/MES integration error without alerting causing production order status inaccuracy; goods movement integration failure creating inventory valuation discrepancy; BOM/routing modification combined with production order creation; combined usage decision and stock transfer authority; production order release without availability check in a material shortage environment |
+| `medium` | MRP exception backlog above resolution threshold for reschedule-out or shortage categories; capacity overload without escalation workflow; available capacity misconfiguration causing unreliable utilization reporting; inspection lot missing for a required operation type; backflush without physical verification in a high-value component environment; manufacturing exception resolution backlog; quality notification routing gap |
+| `low` | Best practice deviation in order type parameter design; scheduling margin key optimization opportunity; minor MRP horizon design gap for a low-value material category |
+
+## Remediation path decision tree
+
+For each finding:
+
+1. **Is this a quality hold bypass in a regulated manufacturing environment?**
+   - Yes → `critical`. Immediately escalate to the quality manager, regulatory affairs team, and internal audit team. Halt shipment of any batch or lot produced during the period when the bypass path was active. Implement usage decision authorization controls and electronic signature requirements per FDA 21 CFR Part 11 or applicable standard before production resumes for the affected material.
+   - No → continue.
+
+2. **Is this a backflush SoD gap, combined usage decision and stock transfer authority, or BOM/routing modification combined with production order creation?**
+   - Yes → `high`. Separate the relevant authorization objects at the role level. For backflush SoD: separate MIGO goods movement authority (MB_MIGO_GI) from inventory adjustment authority. For usage decision and stock transfer: assign usage decision authority (QM_QMEL_WF, C_QMEL_VGR) to a different role than the stock posting authorization. For BOM/routing modification: restrict CS02 and CA02 access to master data stewards only, not production order creators.
+   - No → continue.
+
+3. **Is this a DM/MES integration error without alerting or goods movement integration failure?**
+   - Yes → `high`. Implement automated integration error monitoring with alert notification to the production controller and S/4HANA inventory team. Establish a reprocessing workflow with a defined resolution target. Reconcile any production order status discrepancies between DM/MES and SAP PP and any inventory valuation differences between EWM/MES and the S/4HANA material ledger.
+   - No → continue.
+
+4. **Is this a production order release without availability check?**
+   - Yes → `high`. Enable availability check at order release in the production order type parameters. Configure the availability check rule to cover all relevant material requirement types (BOM components). Define the handling of missing parts (warning vs. hard stop based on material criticality).
+   - No → continue.
+
+5. **Is this an MRP exception backlog or capacity overload finding?**
+   - Yes → `medium`. For MRP exceptions: define exception resolution governance (target processing time per exception category, responsible planner assignment, weekly exception review cadence). For capacity overload: implement capacity leveling strategy with finite scheduling for constrained work centers, and configure automated escalation for overload beyond a defined percentage threshold.
+   - No → continue.
+
+6. **Is this a missing inspection lot, quality notification routing gap, or manufacturing exception resolution backlog?**
+   - Yes → `medium`. For missing inspection lots: verify inspection type assignment in the material master and quality plan. Add the required inspection type. For quality notification routing: define resolution time targets by priority code and assign responsible QM team. For exception resolution backlog: implement exception aging monitoring and escalation triggers in the production exception management process.
+   - No → classify as `low` and provide best practice guidance.
+
+## Workflow
+
+1. **Receive artifacts** — production order status reports, MRP exception aging reports, capacity utilization summaries, QM inspection lot reports, DM/MES integration status exports, backflush configuration summaries, BOM and routing change logs, or written descriptions of the manufacturing execution landscape.
+2. **Classify each finding** by manufacturing execution control domain and finding class.
+3. **Assign risk level** per the table above (critical / high / medium / low).
+4. **Flag critical quality hold bypass findings immediately** — escalate before any other remediation discussion; halt production or shipment if in a regulated environment.
+5. **Apply remediation decision tree** per finding.
+6. **Prioritize** — critical QM hold bypass in regulated environments first; then high backflush SoD, integration, and combined authority findings; then medium MRP, capacity, inspection lot, and exception management gaps; then low best-practice items.
+7. **Return output** per the output contract below.
+
+## Output contract
+
+Return:
+
+1. Manufacturing execution control domain and finding class per finding
+2. Evidence label (documentation-based / user-provided evidence / inference)
+3. Risk level per finding (critical / high / medium / low)
+4. Finding detail: affected plant, production order type, work center, material, inspection type, integration channel, or role/authorization object (if provided), and specific control gap
+5. Recommended remediation action (QM usage decision dual-control, quality hold bypass closure, backflush SoD role separation, DM/MES integration error alerting, availability check enforcement, MRP exception resolution governance, capacity leveling strategy, inspection lot type correction, manufacturing exception escalation, BOM/routing modification access restriction, etc.)
+6. Manufacturing execution control posture after remediation
+7. Escalation notice for any critical QM hold bypass finding in a regulated environment — explicit statement that this requires quality manager, regulatory affairs team, and internal audit team sign-off, and that affected batches or lots must be reviewed before release
+8. Prioritized remediation sequence
+9. Confirmation that no production orders were released, no operations were confirmed, no goods movements were posted, no quality usage decisions were processed, and no BOM or routing records were modified in this review

package/skills/sap/sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+---
+name: sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review
+description: Review SAP Master Data Governance (MDG) configuration and data quality posture: data models and entity types, validation and derivation rules, governance workflow design, consolidation and mass processing configuration, data quality KPI dashboards, and key mapping setup. Flags governance gaps, mis-configured validation rules, workflow bottlenecks, and data quality KPI blind spots. Does not create, modify, or approve master data records.
+allowed-tools: Read Grep Glob WebSearch WebFetch
+metadata:
+  author: "github: Raishin"
+  version: "0.1.0"
+  updated: "2026-06-19"
+  category: data
+  lifecycle: experimental
+---
+
+# SAP MDG Master Data Quality Review
+
+## Purpose
+
+Assess the configuration quality and governance posture of SAP Master Data Governance (MDG) deployments. Evaluate the design of MDG data models and entity types for completeness, extensibility soundness, and alignment with business data standards. Review validation rule configuration (BRFplus-based and custom) for coverage of mandatory field checks, referential integrity, duplicate detection sensitivity, and format standardization. Assess derivation rule design for correctness, dependency order, and risk of silent data overwrite. Evaluate governance workflow design — change request types, workflow routing, parallel versus sequential step configuration, and escalation paths — for process efficiency and control adequacy. Analyze consolidation and mass processing configuration for matching algorithm quality and error handling. Review data quality KPI framework setup for completeness, metric relevance, and dashboard coverage. Assess key mapping configuration for source-to-MDG-to-target system alignment and replication monitoring. Does not create, modify, approve, or reject any master data record in any live system.
+
+## When to use
+
+Use this skill when the user asks to:
+
+- review SAP MDG data model design: custom entity types, node structures (single-object, multi-object, reuse object), key fields, and extensibility approach against the standard MDG data model framework,
+- assess MDG validation rules configured via BRFplus or custom BAdI implementations: rule completeness for mandatory fields, cross-field referential checks, format validations, and duplicate detection rule sensitivity (matching algorithm, threshold settings, match profile),
+- evaluate MDG derivation rule design: derivation sequence, dependency order correctness, risk of a derivation silently overwriting a user-entered value without notification, and coverage of required auto-population fields,
+- review MDG governance workflow configuration: change request type definitions, workflow template design (single-step, multi-step, parallel approval), routing logic based on entity attributes, step ownership assignment, deadline and escalation configuration,
+- assess MDG consolidation and mass processing setup: consolidation data model alignment, matching rule quality, best record calculation logic, error handling for consolidation failures, and mass change template authorization controls,
+- evaluate MDG data quality KPI framework: KPI definition completeness, metric coverage (completeness, conformance, uniqueness, timeliness), rule-to-KPI mapping, data quality score threshold settings, and whether dashboard coverage includes all in-scope MDG domains (business partner, material, supplier, G/L account, cost center, etc.),
+- review key mapping and value mapping configuration: source system–to–MDG key mapping completeness, replication model design (MDG replication framework vs. ALE/IDOC vs. SOA), target system mapping correctness, and replication error monitoring,
+- assess MDG edition and scope baseline: which MDG domains are active (Finance, Supplier, Customer, Material, Custom), whether the MDG S/4HANA integration edition or standalone MDG-M is in use, and whether the governance scope matches the data domains that carry business risk.
+
+## When not to use
+
+- When the user needs live inspection of an MDG system, active change requests, or data quality scores — this skill accepts only user-provided configuration descriptions, BRFplus rule exports, workflow configuration summaries, KPI dashboard screenshots, or written descriptions of the MDG landscape.
+- When the request is about SAP S/4HANA Finance G/L account or cost center data content rather than the MDG governance process that manages it — use `sap-finance-fico-controls-review` for financial accounting controls.
+- When the request is about SAP Data Intelligence or SAP Datasphere data integration pipelines rather than MDG governance processes — those are distinct data management platforms.
+- When the request is about ERP data migration quality (data migration workbench, LTMC, BODS migration projects) rather than steady-state MDG governance — data migration review is a distinct scope.
+
+## Does not touch live systems
+
+This skill operates on user-provided configuration descriptions, BRFplus rule summaries or exports, workflow template configuration notes, MDG data model design documents, KPI framework screenshots or descriptions, key mapping configuration exports, or written descriptions of the MDG landscape. It does not connect to any SAP MDG system, S/4HANA backend, MDG web UI, Fiori launchpad, or replication target system. It does not create, modify, approve, reject, or activate any master data change request, consolidation object, or governance workflow step. All live inspection is out of scope.
+
+## Lean operating rules
+
+- Classify MDG findings before recommending. Every finding must be assigned to an MDG governance domain (data model / validations / derivations / workflow / consolidation / data quality KPIs / key mapping) before a remediation path is proposed.
+- Duplicate detection rule sensitivity must be assessed in context. An overly strict matching threshold produces false positives that bottleneck the consolidation process. An overly loose threshold allows duplicates to persist. Both extremes are findings; the appropriate threshold depends on the data domain and organization's deduplication tolerance.
+- Derivation silent overwrites are a control risk. A derivation rule that overwrites a user-entered field without an explicit notification to the requestor is a data governance risk — users cannot detect when system-derived values replace their input.
+- Governance workflow must have escalation paths. A workflow with no deadline enforcement or escalation routing for overdue steps is a governance bottleneck risk — change requests can stall indefinitely without resolution.
+- Data quality KPIs must cover all in-scope domains. A KPI framework that measures completeness for material master but not for business partner or supplier exposes blind spots in the MDG governance posture.
+- Key mapping gaps create replication failures. Missing or incorrect key mapping between MDG and a target system (ERP, CRM, warehouse management) causes replication failures that may persist undetected if error monitoring is not configured.
+- Mass processing requires authorization controls. MDG mass change templates allow bulk modifications to master data records. Unrestricted access to mass change template execution is a `high` data governance risk.
+- Evidence from user-provided artifacts or official SAP MDG documentation takes precedence over inference.
+- Load only the reference needed for the MDG domain under review.
+
+## Evidence rules
+
+Label all claims with one of:
+
+- `documentation-based` — grounded in SAP Master Data Governance Help Portal documentation, BRFplus documentation, MDG data model guides, or SAP MDG best practice guidance
+- `user-provided evidence` — BRFplus rule exports, workflow configuration summaries, KPI dashboard descriptions, key mapping configuration notes, data model design documents, or written descriptions provided by the user
+- `inference` — derived reasoning not directly confirmed by official docs or user evidence
+
+## Live-environment rules
+
+**This skill does not touch live systems.** There is no MDG API call, Fiori OData request, S/4HANA RFC invocation, BRFplus runtime execution, or replication trigger in this skill's execution path. Users must supply BRFplus rule summaries, workflow configuration descriptions, data model documents, KPI dashboard exports, or written descriptions of their MDG landscape for this skill to review.
+
+## References
+
+Load only when needed:
+
+- [Workflow and output contract](references/workflow-and-output.md) — MDG finding taxonomy, severity assignment, output format.
+- [Safety checklist](references/safety-checklist.md) — non-negotiables, common MDG review mistakes, when to push back.
+- [Official sources](references/official-sources.md) — SAP MDG data model, validation/derivation, governance workflow, consolidation, data quality KPI, and key mapping documentation.
+
+## Response minimum
+
+Return, at minimum:
+
+- **Problem classification**: MDG governance domain(s) affected (data model / validations / derivations / workflow / consolidation / data quality KPIs / key mapping) and specific finding(s) per domain.
+- **Evidence used**: documentation-based / user-provided evidence / inference.
+- **Risk level**: critical (governance bypass, undetected duplicate propagation, unrestricted mass change execution) / high (derivation silent overwrite, missing escalation path, key mapping gap causing replication failures, KPI blind spot for a high-risk domain) / medium (workflow bottleneck, duplicate threshold misconfiguration, incomplete KPI rule mapping) / low (best practice deviation in data model design).
+- **Recommended action**: specific configuration or process remediation per finding (BRFplus rule addition, derivation notification step, workflow escalation configuration, matching threshold adjustment, KPI rule extension, key mapping completion, mass change authorization tightening, etc.).
+- **Refusal / escalation triggers**: if a finding requires live MDG system access to evaluate (active change request status, live data quality scores, replication queue state), state clearly that live inspection is out of scope and ask the user to supply the relevant export or description.
+- **Business impact**: data quality degradation risk, regulatory compliance gap (data accuracy for financial reporting, supplier risk management), operational process disruption from replication failures, or audit finding risk.
+- **Next verification step**: confirm recommended configuration changes against the current MDG setup in a development or quality system before promoting to production.

package/skills/sap/sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review/agents/openai.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+interface:
+  display_name: "SAP MDG Master Data Quality Review"
+  short_description: "Review SAP Master Data Governance (MDG) configuration and data quality posture: data models, validation and derivation rules, governance workflow design, consolidation and mass processing, data quality KPI dashboards, and key mapping. Flags governance gaps, mis-configured validation rules, workflow bottlenecks, and KPI blind spots."
+  default_prompt: "Use $sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review to assess the provided SAP MDG configuration. Classify each finding by MDG governance domain (data model, validations, derivations, workflow, consolidation, data quality KPIs, key mapping), assign a risk level (critical/high/medium/low), and recommend specific remediation actions. Flag any governance bypass risks or unrestricted mass change exposures for immediate escalation. State evidence level (documentation-based, user-provided, inference) and confirm that no live MDG system access and no master data creation or modification is performed."
+dependencies:
+  tools:
+    - type: "web"
+      value: "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/data-modeling"
+      description: "SAP Master Data Governance documentation — primary reference for MDG data model and governance review"
+policy:
+  allow_implicit_invocation: true

package/skills/sap/sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review/metadata.json

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+{
+  "id": "sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review",
+  "name": "SAP MDG Master Data Quality Review",
+  "type": "skill",
+  "provider": "sap",
+  "harnesses": [
+    "claude-code",
+    "codex",
+    "cursor",
+    "gemini",
+    "kiro",
+    "other"
+  ],
+  "summary": "Review SAP Master Data Governance (MDG) configuration and data quality posture: data models and entity types, validation and derivation rules, governance workflow design, consolidation and mass processing, data quality KPI dashboards, and key mapping. Flags governance gaps, mis-configured validation rules, workflow bottlenecks, and data quality KPI blind spots. Does not create, modify, or approve master data records.",
+  "source_type": "original",
+  "category": "data",
+  "official_docs": [
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/data-modeling",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/validation-and-derivation-rules",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/governance-workflow",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/consolidation",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/data-quality-management",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/key-mapping",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/duplicate-check",
+    "https://help.sap.com/docs/SAP_MASTER_DATA_GOVERNANCE/master-data-governance/mdg-for-finance"
+  ],
+  "security_notes": "Does not access live SAP MDG systems, S/4HANA backends, Fiori launchpads, BRFplus runtimes, or replication target systems. Accepts only user-provided BRFplus rule exports, workflow configuration summaries, data model documents, KPI dashboard descriptions, key mapping configuration notes, or written descriptions of the MDG landscape. Never request or accept SAP logon credentials, MDG admin access, or RFC connection details. Never creates, modifies, approves, rejects, or activates any master data change request, consolidation object, or governance workflow step. Mass change template execution is explicitly out of scope.",
+  "last_verified": "2026-06-19",
+  "path": "skills/sap/sap-mdg-master-data-quality-review",
+  "author": "github: Raishin",
+  "version": "0.1.0",
+  "lifecycle": "experimental"
+}