Hire an AI supplier corrective action reviewer

Everything it can hand back

Your task sets the actual outputs. The specialist picks the methods that cover them.

• A sourced issue review: each issue with the verified finding, the supplier's explanation and the evidence behind each
• A draft of the correction steps: containment, correction, evidence to collect and the effectiveness check
• A follow-up register: what the supplier accepted and what is only proposed, with owners and dates
• A status for each fix: evidence meets the standard, evidence falls short, or effectiveness not yet shown
• MISSING lines for gaps, and a record to start the next review from

How it does the job well

• Work from the real catalogue, prices, stock and policies. Check variants and currencies.
• Judge changes by contribution margin, not revenue alone.
• Change one thing at a time on a live store and keep a way to roll back.
• Keep product claims consistent with supplier data and labels.

Mistakes it avoids

• Repeating old recommendations as new findings.
• Treating the supplier's confident reply as evidence.
• Calling a fix effective before the window in your standard has run.
• Describing installation as a running automation.
• Editing live products, prices or themes without approval or a backup.
• Ignoring shipping, returns and fees when judging profit.

What a good result looks like

An example, not your task: A supplier sends back a corrective action reply and you need to check it against your standard.

• Sourced issue review. Each issue with the finding you verified, the supplier's explanation and the evidence behind both. Causes stay hypotheses.
• Fix check. For each fix the supplier calls complete, the proof your standard needs next to the proof received, and one status.
• Correction steps draft. Containment, correction, evidence to collect and the effectiveness check for each issue, against your approval process.
• Follow-up register. What the supplier accepted and what is only proposed, with source IDs, owners and dates, and gaps marked.
• Effectiveness list. Issues where the window in your standard has not yet shown the fix held, so they stay open.
• MISSING lines and CHECKS MISSED. Every owner, date or proof the sources did not give, and every check that could not run.

How the work is checked

• Every verified finding names its source, and no supplier explanation sits in the verified list.
• Every status compares the proof the standard needs with the proof received.
• No cause, inspection, certificate or effectiveness result appears that no source gives.
• Accepted actions and proposed actions sit in separate columns.
• States which checks passed, failed or could not run, and names missing inputs.

These checks have not been run against a model yet. Your AI uses them to check its own work.

Capabilities

• Read the last review. Loads each issue ID, affected lot, accepted action, evidence version and effectiveness status. A first run builds a baseline with you.
• Sort the evidence. The Source note summariser splits your verified findings (defects, dates, lots) from the supplier's explanation. Causes the supplier names stay hypotheses.
• Compare with your standard. For each fix the supplier calls complete, lists the proof your standard requires next to the proof the supplier sent. Anything missing is named.
• Draft the correction steps. The Process and SOP writer drafts containment, correction, evidence collection and the effectiveness review, against your approval process. It prescribes no technical safety decision.
• Record commitments. The Executive action register keeper lists what the supplier has accepted, apart from what is only proposed, with source IDs and any missing owners or dates.
• Check and save. Checks that no inspection, certificate or effectiveness result is invented. Saves the files, a run log and the new record, and keeps the old record.

How the role works

1. Checks your task, context and available tools.
2. Picks the methods needed and prepares a work plan.
3. Carries out supported tasks, with each method's limits and review gates.
4. Checks the real deliverables and corrects supported faults.
5. Hands back files, evidence and unresolved gaps.

Your specialist's working setup

Download the base specialist without a task form or account. README.md and SETUP.md explain how to use the folder. SOUL.md defines its scope. INTAKE.md asks missing questions inside your AI. PLAYBOOK.md, SKILLS.md, BEST_PRACTICES.md, CHECKS.md and HANDOFF.md guide the work and its checked deliverables.

Complete associated skills, supporting files and licences are included. Choose only the methods needed for the actual task. Keep context, working files and accepted feedback in your AI project.

Use this specialist through MCP or the API

Call prepare_specialist with role_id supplier-correction-evidence-review-assistant only. No task is required to load it. Your AI asks what job you need done, what you want back and which relevant context it can use.

For task-led hiring, call find_specialist, explain the suggested specialists and let the user accept or change the team.

Complete ZIP: Download base specialist. API: GET /api/v1/specialists/supplier-correction-evidence-review-assistant/pack. The host AI supplies its own model, tools and execution; a pack does not connect accounts or run a task.

Inputs and helpful context

The specialist starts from the task brief. Only active methods require their inputs.

For the primary method, when used

• Supplier defects or delivery failures, each with an issue ID, a date and the affected lot (from your quality log or inspection reports)
• Inspection evidence: results, measurements, photos or reports (from your receiving or quality checks)
• Your approved acceptance standard: what makes a lot acceptable and what proof a fix needs
• The supplier's written response or draft corrective plan
• The effectiveness window your standard names, such as how many later lots to check (optional if it sits in the standard)
• Last review's record (optional, from the second run on)

Helpful context (optional)

• Your inspection reports or measurement records.
• The supplier's full reply and any attachments.
• Your supplier quality agreement, if you have one.

Tools and access

• A capable chat AI with file support: Keeps the record between reviews. In a plain chat tool you paste the record in each time.
• A capable chat AI with file support: Reads the full pack, your inspection records and the supplier reply in one run.
• A spreadsheet: Holds the register so you can sort by owner and due date after the AI hands it back.
• Any good chat AI: Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini all handle a long source in one message. Claude takes the longest texts.

Functions and deliverables

• Supplier corrective action reviewer: Check supplier fixes against agreed requirements. Get an issue record, evidence gaps and follow-up work before closing a fault.
  • A sourced issue review: each issue with the verified finding, the supplier's explanation and the evidence behind each
  • A draft of the correction steps: containment, correction, evidence to collect and the effectiveness check
  • A follow-up register: what the supplier accepted and what is only proposed, with owners and dates
  • A status for each fix: evidence meets the standard, evidence falls short, or effectiveness not yet shown
  • MISSING lines for gaps, and a record to start the next review from
• Supplier defect response planner: Share supplier faults, inspection records and responses. Get an issue review, proposed corrective steps and a tracker for agreed actions.
  • An issue review that lists each defect with lot, date and evidence reference, and the supplier's explanation as a claim
  • A draft procedure for containment, correction, evidence to collect and the effectiveness check
  • A follow-up register with accepted supplier commitments and proposed actions in two lists
  • Missing owners, dates and facts, each marked MISSING
  • A hand-back summary with the checks that could not run
• Source note summariser: Paste an article, talk or chapter into this source note summariser. You get each claim, how well it is backed, the gaps and three quotes to keep.
  • Every claim with a quote and location, and the evidence behind each rated
  • The gaps and assumptions
  • What it adds to your question, three quotes to keep, and an 80-word summary
• Bug fix evidence recorder: Close a bug fix with a bug fix evidence recorder. Give it the defect and your checks. You get a receipt marked verified, partial or blocked.
  • A seven-line receipt: problem, baseline, root cause, change, proof, gaps and source
  • A status of verified, partial or blocked
  • The single next step needed if proof is missing
  • A note on whether each check was run now or supplied by you
  • A JSON version of the receipt for CI (optional, needs code running)
  Source: GitHub Copilot community.
• Brand profile builder: Share your website. Get a reusable profile covering your products, customers, voice and approved claims, with sources.
  • A folder of eight plain files, from a start file for your AI to a claims list and a change log
  • A tag on every fact, and every claim marked approved, pending or banned
  • A two-sentence diagnosis of your biggest gap, and a list of what's missing and who can answer it
  • A short slice for your next step, if you name one

Tasks you can use it for

• A supplier sends back a corrective action reply and you need to check it against your standard.
• The same defect shows up in a second lot and you need to know if the first fix worked.
• An effectiveness review date is close and nobody has the evidence in one place.
• You take over a supplier file and need to know which issues are open and why.

Limits to check before starting

• A single customer complaint or an internal process audit. This agent is for supplier defects and delivery failures.
• You are choosing between suppliers. Use the Supplier shortlist vetter.
• A safety, recall or regulator question. Take it to the qualified person. The agent does not judge safety or compliance.
• You only want a long supplier email turned into notes. Use the Source note summariser.

Best way to use this role

Give it one clear outcome, the actual files and a definition of done. Keep the work in one AI project so it can reuse checked context and earlier files.

• Add the agent to Claude, ChatGPT or Gemini with its helpers, the Prepare a supplier corrective action review workflow and the Source note summariser. Or download the pack and attach it.
• Paste the issue list, inspection evidence, your acceptance standard and the supplier's reply. Say the review date. From the second review, paste last review's record.
• Read the status of each fix. Check one fix marked as meeting the standard against the real evidence.
• Fill in each MISSING line, especially owners and dates the supplier never gave.
• Send anything to the supplier yourself. The agent only drafts.
• In a chat-only tool, copy the record it gives you and paste it in next time. Installing sets up no schedule, so you start each run.

Read it as data

Read the complete role setup as JSON. Connect your AI to the AI Blocks MCP library and read aiblocks://roles/supplier-correction-evidence-review-assistant for its role instructions and pinned sources.

This is a prepared AI role. No task has run. Your AI carries out authorized work using its available tools and reports the actual deliverables and checks.