CAPA纠正预防

SKILL商业运营
商业运营 未标注权限 许可证不明确
安装这个技能

把质量问题描述变成 CAPA(纠正与预防措施)文档。当用户要调查问题、定纠正措施、验证有效性时立即出动:问题界定→根因分析→纠正措施→预防与验证,强调闭环;产出为模板与草稿,不替代审计结论与专业判断。

一句话选型结论

按资料字段整理

CAPA纠正预防是商业运营类的 Agent Skill,安装方式未标注,权限级别未标注,许可证不明确,有可直接复制的安装命令。技能本质是给模型读的说明书,效果取决于模型与客户端;装完先用一个小任务验证,再放进正式流程。

分类商业运营 安装方式未标注 权限级别未标注权限 许可证许可证不明确
累计安装 未标注 本周 未标注
GitHub 星标 未标注 仓库 未标注
下载量 未标注 技能市场下载数
权限级别 未标注权限 安装前请确认风险范围
许可证 许可证不明确 未说明

安装

未标注
在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行,装完问一句「你有哪些技能」验证
skillhub install zechuan-zhuchuang/capa-officer
  1. 1
    确认客户端支持

    确认你的客户端支持 Skills(Claude、Codex、Cursor 等),并升级到较新的版本。

  2. 2
    拿到技能文件

    执行上面的命令安装;也可以把仓库里的 SKILL.md 手动放进客户端的 skills 目录。

  3. 3
    刷新技能列表

    重新打开客户端,或刷新技能列表,让新放进来的技能被加载。

  4. 4
    验证是否生效

    问一句「你有哪些技能」,确认列表里出现它,再拿一个小任务试跑。

技能档案

商业运营
字段来自技能仓库与公开索引,中文说明由本站标注
作者 / 维护方zechuan-zhuchuang仓库 未标注 · 版本 未标注
宿主客户端未标注技能可被这些客户端加载
安装方式未标注安装包 enterprise
权限级别未标注权限安装前请确认风险范围
许可证未说明许可证不明确,商用前请自行确认条款
仓库可用性available技能仓库当前是否可访问
最近核验未标注上游最后核验时间 · 数据更新 1791528757
正文体量14.5 KBSKILL.md 原文大小,越大说明说明书写得越细

典型使用场景

3 类
按分类整理的常见用法,具体以 SKILL.md 为准
写运营方案

按目标产出活动方案与执行清单。

分析数据与指标

从报表里找问题、给结论。

整理客户与销售材料

把客户信息与话术整理成可直接用的材料。

选择建议

装之前先看这几条
按条目字段给出的判断,不替你决定用不用

值得选的地方

  • 有可直接复制的安装命令,不用自己翻文档找入口。

先想清楚的地方

  • 没有标注权限级别,实际能做什么要装好后确认。
  • 许可证不明确,商用或二次分发前先到仓库确认条款。
  • 没有做站内核验,内容以作者仓库为准。
  • 技能只是说明书,实际效果取决于模型与客户端,装完先用小任务试一遍。

更适合

  • 需要在商业运营场景里给模型补一套做法的人。
  • 愿意先读一遍 SKILL.md、确认它会让模型做什么的人。

不太适合

  • 对许可证要求很严、必须明确可商用的人。
  • 只想装完就自动变强、不打算看说明书的人。

同类对比

6 个同类
同分类里挑最接近的几条,字段以各自详情页为准
技能权限级别安装方式累计安装宿主客户端安装命令
CAPA纠正预防当前 未标注权限 未标注 未标注 未标注 有
MX 股票筛选器 联网访问 ClawHub 市场 79.9 万 OpenClaw 有
交易 未标注权限 ClawHub 市场 58.1 万 OpenClaw 有
营销技巧 只读 ClawHub 市场 54.0 万 OpenClaw 有
百灵鸟好 联网访问 GitHub 仓库 52.6 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
股票信息浏览器 接触敏感数据 ClawHub 市场 40.5 万 OpenClaw 有

SKILL.md 全文

14.5 KB
模型实际读到的说明书原文,来自技能仓库

CAPA Officer

Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) management within Quality Management Systems, focusing on systematic root cause analysis, action implementation, and effectiveness verification.


Table of Contents

  • CAPA Investigation Workflow
  • Root Cause Analysis
  • Corrective Action Planning
  • Effectiveness Verification
  • CAPA Metrics and Reporting
  • Reference Documentation
  • Tools

CAPA Investigation Workflow

Conduct systematic CAPA investigation from initiation through closure:

  1. Document trigger event with objective evidence
  2. Assess significance and determine CAPA necessity
  3. Form investigation team with relevant expertise
  4. Collect data and evidence systematically
  5. Select and apply appropriate RCA methodology
  6. Identify root cause(s) with supporting evidence
  7. Develop corrective and preventive actions
  8. Validation: Root cause explains all symptoms; if eliminated, problem would not recur

CAPA Necessity Determination

Trigger Type CAPA Required Criteria
Customer complaint (safety) Yes Any complaint involving patient/user safety
Customer complaint (quality) Evaluate Based on severity and frequency
Internal audit finding (Major) Yes Systematic failure or absence of element
Internal audit finding (Minor) Recommended Isolated lapse or partial implementation
Nonconformance (recurring) Yes Same NC type occurring 3+ times
Nonconformance (isolated) Evaluate Based on severity and risk
External audit finding Yes All Major and Minor findings
Trend analysis Evaluate Based on trend significance

Investigation Team Composition

CAPA Severity Required Team Members
Critical CAPA Officer, Process Owner, QA Manager, Subject Matter Expert, Management Rep
Major CAPA Officer, Process Owner, Subject Matter Expert
Minor CAPA Officer, Process Owner

Evidence Collection Checklist

  • [ ] Problem description with specific details (what, where, when, who, how much)
  • [ ] Timeline of events leading to issue
  • [ ] Relevant records and documentation
  • [ ] Interview notes from involved personnel
  • [ ] Photos or physical evidence (if applicable)
  • [ ] Related complaints, NCs, or previous CAPAs
  • [ ] Process parameters and specifications

Root Cause Analysis

Select and apply appropriate RCA methodology based on problem characteristics.

RCA Method Selection Decision Tree

Is the issue safety-critical or involves system reliability?
├── Yes → Use FAULT TREE ANALYSIS
└── No → Is human error the suspected primary cause?
    ├── Yes → Use HUMAN FACTORS ANALYSIS
    └── No → How many potential contributing factors?
        ├── 1-2 factors (linear causation) → Use 5 WHY ANALYSIS
        ├── 3-6 factors (complex, systemic) → Use FISHBONE DIAGRAM
        └── Unknown/proactive assessment → Use FMEA

5 Why Analysis

Use when: Single-cause issues with linear causation, process deviations with clear failure point.

Template:

PROBLEM: [Clear, specific statement]

WHY 1: Why did [problem] occur?
BECAUSE: [First-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]

WHY 2: Why did [first-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Second-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]

WHY 3: Why did [second-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Third-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]

WHY 4: Why did [third-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Fourth-level cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]

WHY 5: Why did [fourth-level cause] occur?
BECAUSE: [Root cause]
EVIDENCE: [Supporting data]

Example - Calibration Overdue:

PROBLEM: pH meter (EQ-042) found 2 months overdue for calibration

WHY 1: Why was calibration overdue?
BECAUSE: Equipment was not on calibration schedule
EVIDENCE: Calibration schedule reviewed, EQ-042 not listed

WHY 2: Why was it not on the schedule?
BECAUSE: Schedule not updated when equipment was purchased
EVIDENCE: Purchase date 2023-06-15, schedule dated 2023-01-01

WHY 3: Why was the schedule not updated?
BECAUSE: No process requires schedule update at equipment purchase
EVIDENCE: SOP-EQ-001 reviewed, no such requirement

WHY 4: Why is there no such requirement?
BECAUSE: Procedure written before equipment tracking was centralized
EVIDENCE: SOP last revised 2019, equipment system implemented 2021

WHY 5: Why has procedure not been updated?
BECAUSE: Periodic review did not assess compatibility with new systems
EVIDENCE: No review against new equipment system documented

ROOT CAUSE: Procedure review process does not assess compatibility
with organizational systems implemented after original procedure creation.

Fishbone Diagram Categories (6M)

Category Focus Areas Typical Causes
Man (People) Training, competency, workload Skill gaps, fatigue, communication
Machine (Equipment) Calibration, maintenance, age Wear, malfunction, inadequate capacity
Method (Process) Procedures, work instructions Unclear steps, missing controls
Material Specifications, suppliers, storage Out-of-spec, degradation, contamination
Measurement Calibration, methods, interpretation Instrument error, wrong method
Mother Nature Temperature, humidity, cleanliness Environmental excursions

See references/rca-methodologies.md for complete method details and templates.

Root Cause Validation

Before proceeding to action planning, validate root cause:

  • [ ] Root cause can be verified with objective evidence
  • [ ] If root cause is eliminated, problem would not recur
  • [ ] Root cause is within organizational control
  • [ ] Root cause explains all observed symptoms
  • [ ] No other significant causes remain unaddressed

Corrective Action Planning

Develop effective actions addressing identified root causes:

  1. Define immediate containment actions
  2. Develop corrective actions targeting root cause
  3. Identify preventive actions for similar processes
  4. Assign responsibilities and resources
  5. Establish timeline with milestones
  6. Define success criteria and verification method
  7. Document in CAPA action plan
  8. Validation: Actions directly address root cause; success criteria are measurable

Action Types

Type Purpose Timeline Example
Containment Stop immediate impact 24-72 hours Quarantine affected product
Correction Fix the specific occurrence 1-2 weeks Rework or replace affected items
Corrective Eliminate root cause 30-90 days Revise procedure, add controls
Preventive Prevent in other areas 60-120 days Extend solution to similar processes

Action Plan Components

ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE

CAPA Number: [CAPA-XXXX]
Root Cause: [Identified root cause]

ACTION 1: [Specific action description]
- Type: [ ] Containment [ ] Correction [ ] Corrective [ ] Preventive
- Responsible: [Name, Title]
- Due Date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
- Resources: [Required resources]
- Success Criteria: [Measurable outcome]
- Verification Method: [How success will be verified]

ACTION 2: [Specific action description]
...

IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE:
Week 1: [Milestone]
Week 2: [Milestone]
Week 4: [Milestone]
Week 8: [Milestone]

APPROVAL:
CAPA Owner: _____________ Date: _______
Process Owner: _____________ Date: _______
QA Manager: _____________ Date: _______

Action Effectiveness Indicators

Indicator Target Red Flag
Action scope Addresses root cause completely Treats only symptoms
Specificity Measurable deliverables Vague commitments
Timeline Aggressive but achievable No due dates or unrealistic
Resources Identified and allocated Not specified
Sustainability Permanent solution Temporary fix

Effectiveness Verification

Verify corrective actions achieved intended results:

  1. Allow adequate implementation period (minimum 30-90 days)
  2. Collect post-implementation data
  3. Compare to pre-implementation baseline
  4. Evaluate against success criteria
  5. Verify no recurrence during verification period
  6. Document verification evidence
  7. Determine CAPA effectiveness
  8. Validation: All criteria met with objective evidence; no recurrence observed

Verification Timeline Guidelines

CAPA Severity Wait Period Verification Window
Critical 30 days 30-90 days post-implementation
Major 60 days 60-180 days post-implementation
Minor 90 days 90-365 days post-implementation

Verification Methods

Method Use When Evidence Required
Data trend analysis Quantifiable issues Pre/post comparison, trend charts
Process audit Procedure compliance issues Audit checklist, interview notes
Record review Documentation issues Sample records, compliance rate
Testing/inspection Product quality issues Test results, pass/fail data
Interview/observation Training issues Interview notes, observation records

Effectiveness Determination

Did recurrence occur during verification period?
├── Yes → CAPA INEFFECTIVE (re-investigate root cause)
└── No → Were all effectiveness criteria met?
    ├── Yes → CAPA EFFECTIVE (proceed to closure)
    └── No → Extent of gap?
        ├── Minor gap → Extend verification or accept with justification
        └── Significant gap → CAPA INEFFECTIVE (revise actions)

See references/effectiveness-verification-guide.md for detailed procedures.


CAPA Metrics and Reporting

Monitor CAPA program performance through key indicators.

Key Performance Indicators

Metric Target Calculation
CAPA cycle time <60 days average (Close Date - Open Date) / Number of CAPAs
Overdue rate <10% Overdue CAPAs / Total Open CAPAs
First-time effectiveness >90% Effective on first verification / Total verified
Recurrence rate <5% Recurred issues / Total closed CAPAs
Investigation quality 100% root cause validated Root causes validated / Total CAPAs

Aging Analysis Categories

Age Bucket Status Action Required
0-30 days On track Monitor progress
31-60 days Monitor Review for delays
61-90 days Warning Escalate to management
>90 days Critical Management intervention required

Management Review Inputs

Monthly CAPA status report includes:
- Open CAPA count by severity and status
- Overdue CAPA list with owners
- Cycle time trends
- Effectiveness rate trends
- Source analysis (complaints, audits, NCs)
- Recommendations for improvement


Reference Documentation

Root Cause Analysis Methodologies

references/rca-methodologies.md contains:

  • Method selection decision tree
  • 5 Why analysis template and example
  • Fishbone diagram categories and template
  • Fault Tree Analysis for safety-critical issues
  • Human Factors Analysis for people-related causes
  • FMEA for proactive risk assessment
  • Hybrid approach guidance

Effectiveness Verification Guide

references/effectiveness-verification-guide.md contains:

  • Verification planning requirements
  • Verification method selection
  • Effectiveness criteria definition (SMART)
  • Closure requirements by severity
  • Ineffective CAPA process
  • Documentation templates

Tools

CAPA Tracker

# Generate CAPA status report
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --capas capas.json

# Interactive mode for manual entry
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --interactive

# JSON output for integration
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --capas capas.json --output json

# Generate sample data file
python scripts/capa_tracker.py --sample &gt; sample_capas.json

Calculates and reports:
- Summary metrics (open, closed, overdue, cycle time, effectiveness)
- Status distribution
- Severity and source analysis
- Aging report by time bucket
- Overdue CAPA list
- Actionable recommendations

Sample CAPA Input

{
  &quot;capas&quot;: [
    {
      &quot;capa_number&quot;: &quot;CAPA-2024-001&quot;,
      &quot;title&quot;: &quot;Calibration overdue for pH meter&quot;,
      &quot;description&quot;: &quot;pH meter EQ-042 found 2 months overdue&quot;,
      &quot;source&quot;: &quot;AUDIT&quot;,
      &quot;severity&quot;: &quot;MAJOR&quot;,
      &quot;status&quot;: &quot;VERIFICATION&quot;,
      &quot;open_date&quot;: &quot;2024-06-15&quot;,
      &quot;target_date&quot;: &quot;2024-08-15&quot;,
      &quot;owner&quot;: &quot;J. Smith&quot;,
      &quot;root_cause&quot;: &quot;Procedure review gap&quot;,
      &quot;corrective_action&quot;: &quot;Updated SOP-EQ-001&quot;
    }
  ]
}

Regulatory Requirements

ISO 13485:2016 Clause 8.5

Sub-clause Requirement Key Activities
8.5.2 Corrective Action Eliminate cause of nonconformity NC review, cause determination, action evaluation, implementation, effectiveness review
8.5.3 Preventive Action Eliminate potential nonconformity Trend analysis, cause determination, action evaluation, implementation, effectiveness review

FDA 21 CFR 820.100

Required CAPA elements:
- Procedures for implementing corrective and preventive action
- Analyzing quality data sources (complaints, NCs, audits, service records)
- Investigating cause of nonconformities
- Identifying actions needed to correct and prevent recurrence
- Verifying actions are effective and do not adversely affect device
- Submitting relevant information for management review

Common FDA 483 Observations

Observation Root Cause Pattern
CAPA not initiated for recurring issue Trend analysis not performed
Root cause analysis superficial Inadequate investigation training
Effectiveness not verified No verification procedure
Actions do not address root cause Symptom treatment vs. cause elimination

常见问题

5 问
答案由本站依据条目字段整理
CAPA纠正预防怎么安装?

在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行:skillhub install zechuan-zhuchuang/capa-officer。安装方式为未标注。装完刷新技能列表或重开客户端。

CAPA纠正预防支持哪些客户端?

资料没有标注宿主客户端,但只要客户端支持 Skills(Claude、Codex、Cursor 等),一般都能加载。

CAPA纠正预防权限高吗,安全吗?

权限级别为未标注权限。安装前先看它会读取或写入哪些内容。

CAPA纠正预防收费吗?

本站不代收费用,也没有标注具体价格。是否收费取决于技能本身和所用的模型或客户端,正式使用前按作者说明确认。

CAPA纠正预防用什么许可证?

许可证标注为 未说明(许可证不明确)。商用或二次分发前请到仓库确认条款原文。

热门专题

按场景挑技能
全部专题 →

技能内容以作者仓库为准;分类、权限级别与许可证状态的中文说明为中文整理,最近核验 未标注。