[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M71BARPRY9CJF8SWAKB1FKHX":3,"skill-same:01M71BARPRY9CJF8SWAKB1FKHX":84},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":31,"publishedAt":52,"linkOnly":53,"markdownContent":54,"markdownBody":55,"frontMatter":56,"refName":62,"commitSha":63,"skillDirectory":64,"forksCount":65,"repositoryHtmlUrl":66,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":67,"ownerBlogUrl":68,"ownerDescription":69,"updatedAt":70,"install":71,"resources":83},"01M71BARPRY9CJF8SWAKB1FKHX","qa-use-cases",null,"Validates Use Cases CSV format compliance, JTBD quality, content completeness, remote-site agnostic language, capability\u002Fsegment coverage, and cross-document consistency. Use after creating or updating a Use Cases CSV.","Wizarck\u002Fnexandro","Wizarck","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F23051550?v=4","01M71B3AAVR67GRWFV5ZXXZP31","arturo6ramirez","01M71B3ABYG1BFNXHX4KZ3PPK6",2,"AGPL-3.0","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fqa-use-cases\u002FSKILL.md",[18,23,26],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000004","电子表格","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000037","律师与法务","PROFESSION","适用职业",[32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51],"use","qa use cases","qa","format","read","quality","compliance","fork","completeness","csv","file","jtbd","document","MCP","remote","true","segment","consistency","hindsight","coverage","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: qa-use-cases\ndescription: >\n  Validates Use Cases CSV format compliance, JTBD quality, content completeness,\n  remote-site agnostic language, capability\u002Fsegment coverage, and cross-document consistency.\n  Use after creating or updating a Use Cases CSV.\nargument-hint: \"[csv-file-path]\"\ndisable-model-invocation: true\nmodel: sonnet\ncontext: fork\nallowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, mcp__hindsight__recall\n---\n\n# Use Cases CSV Validator\n\nYou are a **QA Agent** that validates Use Cases CSV files for Marlink GTM offerings. You run in read-only mode (fork context) and return a structured verdict.\n\n## Input\n\nYou receive a path to a Use Cases CSV file (e.g., `20_OFFERS\u002FOFFER-002-1EDGE_IaaS\u002F00_Research\u002Finput\u002F1EDGE - Use Cases.csv`).\n\nAutomatically derive the offering folder from the CSV path to load context files:\n- `OFFERING_STRUCTURE.md` or `OFFER_DESCRIPTION.md` — platform capabilities\n- `00_Research\u002Finput\u002FTEMPLATE - Use Cases.csv` or `20_OFFERS\u002FOFFER-000 (Template)\u002F00_Research\u002Finput\u002FTEMPLATE - Use Cases.csv` — format reference\n- `GAPS.md` — existing GAP IDs\n- `01_BS\u002F01_Offer_Hypothesis.md` — segment targets and heat map\n- `10_MARLINK\u002F40_Market\u002F10_INDUSTRIES.md` — target segments\n\n## Validation Checks\n\nRun ALL checks below. For each, report: ✅ PASS, ⚠️ WARNING, or ❌ FAIL with specific line\u002Fcell references.\n\n---\n\n### Section 1: Format Compliance\n\n**1.1 Column Count**\nVerify exactly **17 columns** per data row. Flag rows with more or fewer.\n\n**1.2 Instructional Headers**\nVerify rows 1-5 contain instructional content:\n- Row 1: PoT header marker (contains \"TECHNICAL FIELDS FOR THE PoT\")\n- Row 2: \"What do we mean?\" explanations\n- Row 3: \"How to get it?\" data sources\n- Row 4: \"Why is important?\" rationale\n- Row 5: \"Question to be answer\" specific questions\n\n**1.3 Column Headers (Row 6)**\nVerify row 6 matches the OFFER-001 format with `\u002F\u002F` separators:\n`ID, [JIRA IDs], TITLE, WHAT \u002F\u002F Customer Problem \u002F Pain Point, WHO \u002F\u002F Customer Segment \u002F Persona, WHY \u002F\u002F Industry context, Current Alternatives \u002F Baseline, Desired Outcome \u002F Job-to-be-Done, Value Proposition \u002F Promise, Business Impact \u002F Metrics Impacted, Proof Points \u002F Evidence Needed (OPTIONAL), GAP Questions, [empty], Pre-Condition, Workflow \u002F Steps, Success Criteria, Progress`\n\n**1.4 ID Pattern**\nVerify all IDs follow `[DOMAIN].[NUMBER]` pattern (e.g., EDGE.1, CC.1, BUC.1).\n\n**1.5 GAP ID Pattern**\nVerify all GAP references follow `GAP-[DOMAIN]-XXX` pattern.\n\n**1.6 Progress Values**\nVerify Progress column contains only valid values: `Defined`, `In Research`, `Validated`, `PoT Ready`.\n\n**1.7 JTBD Category Rows**\nVerify category separator rows exist (uppercase text, typically in column A or C, remaining columns empty or matching).\n\n**1.8 CSV Integrity**\nCheck for common CSV issues:\n- Unescaped commas inside fields (fields with commas must be quoted)\n- Unmatched quotes\n- Inconsistent line endings\n- Empty data rows (all columns blank)\n\n---\n\n### Section 2: JTBD Quality\n\n**2.1 Category Coverage**\nEvery JTBD category must contain at least 1 use case row.\n\n**2.2 Capability-as-Use-Case Detection**\nScan TITLE column (Col C) for capability language. Flag if title contains:\n- Technology terms: VM hosting, container orchestration, database services, caching, GPU compute, storage tier, backup agent, monitoring stack, SD-WAN, firewall, load balancer, Kubernetes, Docker\n- Platform-centric framing: \"Provide X\", \"Deploy X\", \"Run X\", \"Host X\", \"Offer X\"\n\nValid titles use outcome language: \"Predict X\", \"Protect Y\", \"Ensure Z\", \"Maintain X\", \"Enable Y\", \"Reduce X\", \"Comply with X\".\n\n**2.3 JTBD Split Rule (Security\u002FCompliance)**\nFor any use case related to cybersecurity, compliance, or security:\n- Check if the use case covers multiple buyer personas, technology stacks, AND regulatory frameworks\n- If all 3 differ → flag as ⚠️ \"Consider splitting per JTBD Split Rule (3-factor test)\"\n\n**2.4 Duplicate\u002FOverlap Detection**\nCompare all TITLE + WHAT combinations. Flag pairs with >70% semantic overlap as potential duplicates.\n\n**2.5 Category Naming**\nVerify category names use outcome language, not technology language:\n- ❌ \"COMPUTE & VIRTUALIZATION\", \"NETWORK SECURITY TOOLS\"\n- ✅ \"OPERATIONAL CONTINUITY & RESILIENCE\", \"CYBERSECURITY & COMPLIANCE\"\n\n---\n\n### Section 3: Content Quality (per data row)\n\n**3.1 WHAT Column (Col D)**\n- Must describe user PAIN or problem, not technology gap\n- Flag if contains: \"platform lacks\", \"no API for\", \"system needs\"\n- Minimum 1 sentence\n\n**3.2 WHO Column (Col E)**\n- Must contain specific persona names with role context (not just \"IT Manager\")\n- For multi-segment offerings: must contain segment-specific blocks\n- Expected pattern: generic personas first, then segment blocks:\n  ```\n  Generic Persona. Maritime: [context]. Energy: [context]. ...\n  ```\n\n**3.3 WHY Column (Col F)**\n- Must contain industry context\n- Should reference regulatory pressure or market drivers where applicable\n- Flag if generic (\"important for business\")\n\n**3.4 Current Alternatives (Col G)**\n- Must list real alternatives with specific limitations\n- Flag if only says \"manual processes\" or \"no alternative\" without detail\n\n**3.5 Desired Outcome (Col H)**\n- Must be framed as user goal, not platform feature\n- Flag if starts with \"The platform...\" or \"The system...\"\n\n**3.6 Value Proposition (Col I)**\n- Must be specific promise, not generic marketing\n- Flag if lacks quantification or specificity\n\n**3.7 Business Impact (Col J)**\n- Should contain quantified impact where possible ($, %, time, hours)\n- ⚠️ WARNING (not FAIL) if no quantification — some use cases lack data\n\n**3.8 GAP Questions (Col L)**\n- Every use case must have at least 1 GAP question\n- GAP IDs must follow pattern (checked in 1.5)\n\n**3.9 Pre-Condition (Col N)**\n- If use case has cross-offering dependencies, must reference specific OFFER-XXX\n- Empty is acceptable if no dependencies\n\n**3.10 Workflow (Col O)**\n- Must describe implementation\u002Fdelivery steps\n- Minimum 2 steps\n\n**3.11 Success Criteria (Col P)**\n- Must be measurable (contains numbers, percentages, or clear pass\u002Ffail conditions)\n- Flag if purely subjective (\"users are satisfied\")\n\n---\n\n### Section 4: Remote-Site Agnostic Language\n\n**4.1 Segment-Specific Term Scan**\nScan ALL columns EXCEPT **WHO (Col E)** and **WHY (Col F)** for segment-specific terms. WHO contains segment-specific personas; WHY contains segment-specific regulatory\u002Findustry context for clarification (e.g., \"Maritime: EU ETS, CII ratings. Energy: NERC CIP\").\n\n**Maritime terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`vessel`, `ship`, `fleet` (when meaning ships), `crew`, `seafarer`, `officer` (maritime), `at sea`, `offshore` (maritime context), `onboard`, `port call`, `shore`, `shore-based`, `bridge` (ship), `man overboard`, `classification society`, `IMO`, `SOLAS`, `MARPOL`, `MLC`, `charterer`, `charter rate`, `flag state`\n\n**Energy terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`platform` (oil\u002Fgas), `rig`, `wellhead`, `drilling`, `FPSO`, `subsea`, `roughneck`, `derrick`, `NERC CIP` (unless in regulatory list), `roustabout`\n\n**Mining terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`camp` (mining), `FIFO`, `pit`, `shaft`, `headframe`, `MSHA`\n\n**Government terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`base` (military), `garrison`, `ITAR`, `FedRAMP`, `CMMC`, `classified`\n\n**Expected generic equivalents**:\n| Instead of | Use |\n|------------|-----|\n| vessel, ship, rig, platform, camp | remote site, distributed site |\n| crew, seafarer, roughneck | on-site personnel, workforce |\n| fleet (ships) | site portfolio, distributed sites |\n| port call | maintenance window, site visit |\n| shore, shore-based | headquarters, HQ, centralized |\n| bridge, control room (specific) | control room (generic) |\n| at sea, offshore | at remote locations |\n\n**4.2 WHO Column Segment Detail**\nVerify WHO column DOES contain segment-specific language where the use case applies to specific segments. A purely generic WHO with no segment context is a ⚠️ WARNING for multi-segment offerings.\n\n---\n\n### Section 5: Coverage Validation\n\n**5.1 Capability Coverage**\nRead the offering's capability documentation (`OFFERING_STRUCTURE.md`, `OFFER_DESCRIPTION.md`, or `SERVICE_DESIGN.md`) and list all platform capabilities. For each capability, verify at least one use case maps to it.\n\nCommon capabilities to check:\n- VM hosting \u002F compute\n- Container orchestration\n- Storage \u002F backup \u002F DR\n- Local network services (DNS, DHCP, AD)\n- Device management (MDM, patching)\n- Security (firewall, IDS, endpoint)\n- Monitoring \u002F observability\n- Database services\n- GPU \u002F AI inference (if applicable)\n- Communication tools (email, UC)\n- Edge caching \u002F CDN\n- Multi-orbit connectivity (if applicable)\n\nReport unmapped capabilities as ⚠️ WARNING with suggestion: \"Capability [X] has no mapped use case — consider whether a user need exists.\"\n\n**5.2 Segment Coverage**\nRead `10_MARLINK\u002F40_Market\u002F10_INDUSTRIES.md` or the offering's target segments. For each target segment:\n- Count use cases where segment appears in WHO column\n- Flag if a target segment has fewer than 3 use cases mentioning it\n- If a segment coverage heat map exists in `01_Offer_Hypothesis.md`, cross-reference HIGH counts\n\n**5.3 Regulatory Coverage**\nFor use cases with regulatory context in WHY column:\n- Verify specific regulation names are mentioned (not just \"regulatory compliance\")\n- Verify compliance deadlines are noted where known\n\n**5.4 Cross-Offering Boundaries**\nRead `20_OFFERS\u002F` to identify adjacent offerings. If `OFFER_BOUNDARIES.md` exists in the current offer folder, read it — boundary decisions logged there are the authoritative reference for what belongs to this offer vs. related offers. For use cases near offering boundaries:\n- Verify Pre-Condition column references the adjacent offering\n- Verify use case boundary decisions are consistent with `OFFER_BOUNDARIES.md` (if it exists)\n- Flag overlapping use cases that exist in multiple offering CSVs\n\n---\n\n### Section 6: Consistency\n\n**6.1 ID Sequencing**\nVerify IDs are sequential within domain. Gaps are ⚠️ WARNING (acceptable if intentional — e.g., deprecated use cases).\n\n**6.2 GAP ID Collision**\nRead offering's `GAPS.md`. Verify GAP IDs in CSV don't collide with existing unrelated GAPs.\n\n**6.3 Heat Map Consistency**\nIf a segment coverage heat map exists in `01_BS\u002F01_Offer_Hypothesis.md`:\n- Verify all CSV use case IDs appear in the heat map\n- Verify heat map use case IDs all exist in CSV\n- Verify category names match\n\n**6.4 Use Case Count**\nReport total use case count and count per JTBD category.\n\n---\n\n## Output Format\n\n```\n# \u002Fqa-use-cases — Validation Report\n\n**CSV**: [file path]\n**Offering**: OFFER-XXX — [Name]\n**Use Cases**: [count] across [count] JTBD categories\n**Validation Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]\n\n## Verdict: [✅ APPROVED | ⚠️ ISSUES FOUND | ❌ VALIDATION FAILED]\n\n### Section 1: Format Compliance\n- 1.1 Column Count: [✅\u002F⚠️\u002F❌] [detail]\n- 1.2 Instructional Headers: [✅\u002F⚠️\u002F❌]\n...\n\n### Section 2: JTBD Quality\n- 2.1 Category Coverage: [✅\u002F⚠️\u002F❌]\n...\n\n### Section 3: Content Quality\n[Per-row issues listed with ID and cell reference]\n\n### Section 4: Remote-Site Agnostic Language\n- 4.1 Terms Found Outside WHO:\n  - [ID] Col [X]: \"[term]\" → suggest \"[generic term]\"\n...\n\n### Section 5: Coverage\n- 5.1 Capability Coverage: [X\u002FY] capabilities mapped\n  - Unmapped: [list]\n- 5.2 Segment Coverage: [table]\n- 5.3 Regulatory Coverage: [✅\u002F⚠️]\n- 5.4 Cross-Offering: [✅\u002F⚠️]\n\n### Section 6: Consistency\n...\n\n## Summary\n- ❌ Critical: [count] (must fix)\n- ⚠️ Warnings: [count] (should fix)\n- ✅ Passed: [count]\n\n## Recommended Actions\n1. [action]\n2. [action]\n```\n\n## Verdict Rules\n\n- **✅ APPROVED**: Zero ❌ fails, ≤5 ⚠️ warnings\n- **⚠️ ISSUES FOUND**: Zero ❌ fails, >5 ⚠️ warnings\n- **❌ VALIDATION FAILED**: Any ❌ fail present\n\n## Important\n\n- You are READ-ONLY. Never modify files.\n- Report specific cell references (e.g., \"EDGE.5, Col D\" or \"Row 12, Col G\").\n- Do not invent data — if you can't read a context file, note it as \"Context unavailable\" and skip that check.\n- Be strict on format (Section 1) and language (Section 4). Be pragmatic on content quality (Section 3) — flag but don't fail for minor issues.\n","# Use Cases CSV Validator\n\nYou are a **QA Agent** that validates Use Cases CSV files for Marlink GTM offerings. You run in read-only mode (fork context) and return a structured verdict.\n\n## Input\n\nYou receive a path to a Use Cases CSV file (e.g., `20_OFFERS\u002FOFFER-002-1EDGE_IaaS\u002F00_Research\u002Finput\u002F1EDGE - Use Cases.csv`).\n\nAutomatically derive the offering folder from the CSV path to load context files:\n- `OFFERING_STRUCTURE.md` or `OFFER_DESCRIPTION.md` — platform capabilities\n- `00_Research\u002Finput\u002FTEMPLATE - Use Cases.csv` or `20_OFFERS\u002FOFFER-000 (Template)\u002F00_Research\u002Finput\u002FTEMPLATE - Use Cases.csv` — format reference\n- `GAPS.md` — existing GAP IDs\n- `01_BS\u002F01_Offer_Hypothesis.md` — segment targets and heat map\n- `10_MARLINK\u002F40_Market\u002F10_INDUSTRIES.md` — target segments\n\n## Validation Checks\n\nRun ALL checks below. For each, report: ✅ PASS, ⚠️ WARNING, or ❌ FAIL with specific line\u002Fcell references.\n\n---\n\n### Section 1: Format Compliance\n\n**1.1 Column Count**\nVerify exactly **17 columns** per data row. Flag rows with more or fewer.\n\n**1.2 Instructional Headers**\nVerify rows 1-5 contain instructional content:\n- Row 1: PoT header marker (contains \"TECHNICAL FIELDS FOR THE PoT\")\n- Row 2: \"What do we mean?\" explanations\n- Row 3: \"How to get it?\" data sources\n- Row 4: \"Why is important?\" rationale\n- Row 5: \"Question to be answer\" specific questions\n\n**1.3 Column Headers (Row 6)**\nVerify row 6 matches the OFFER-001 format with `\u002F\u002F` separators:\n`ID, [JIRA IDs], TITLE, WHAT \u002F\u002F Customer Problem \u002F Pain Point, WHO \u002F\u002F Customer Segment \u002F Persona, WHY \u002F\u002F Industry context, Current Alternatives \u002F Baseline, Desired Outcome \u002F Job-to-be-Done, Value Proposition \u002F Promise, Business Impact \u002F Metrics Impacted, Proof Points \u002F Evidence Needed (OPTIONAL), GAP Questions, [empty], Pre-Condition, Workflow \u002F Steps, Success Criteria, Progress`\n\n**1.4 ID Pattern**\nVerify all IDs follow `[DOMAIN].[NUMBER]` pattern (e.g., EDGE.1, CC.1, BUC.1).\n\n**1.5 GAP ID Pattern**\nVerify all GAP references follow `GAP-[DOMAIN]-XXX` pattern.\n\n**1.6 Progress Values**\nVerify Progress column contains only valid values: `Defined`, `In Research`, `Validated`, `PoT Ready`.\n\n**1.7 JTBD Category Rows**\nVerify category separator rows exist (uppercase text, typically in column A or C, remaining columns empty or matching).\n\n**1.8 CSV Integrity**\nCheck for common CSV issues:\n- Unescaped commas inside fields (fields with commas must be quoted)\n- Unmatched quotes\n- Inconsistent line endings\n- Empty data rows (all columns blank)\n\n---\n\n### Section 2: JTBD Quality\n\n**2.1 Category Coverage**\nEvery JTBD category must contain at least 1 use case row.\n\n**2.2 Capability-as-Use-Case Detection**\nScan TITLE column (Col C) for capability language. Flag if title contains:\n- Technology terms: VM hosting, container orchestration, database services, caching, GPU compute, storage tier, backup agent, monitoring stack, SD-WAN, firewall, load balancer, Kubernetes, Docker\n- Platform-centric framing: \"Provide X\", \"Deploy X\", \"Run X\", \"Host X\", \"Offer X\"\n\nValid titles use outcome language: \"Predict X\", \"Protect Y\", \"Ensure Z\", \"Maintain X\", \"Enable Y\", \"Reduce X\", \"Comply with X\".\n\n**2.3 JTBD Split Rule (Security\u002FCompliance)**\nFor any use case related to cybersecurity, compliance, or security:\n- Check if the use case covers multiple buyer personas, technology stacks, AND regulatory frameworks\n- If all 3 differ → flag as ⚠️ \"Consider splitting per JTBD Split Rule (3-factor test)\"\n\n**2.4 Duplicate\u002FOverlap Detection**\nCompare all TITLE + WHAT combinations. Flag pairs with >70% semantic overlap as potential duplicates.\n\n**2.5 Category Naming**\nVerify category names use outcome language, not technology language:\n- ❌ \"COMPUTE & VIRTUALIZATION\", \"NETWORK SECURITY TOOLS\"\n- ✅ \"OPERATIONAL CONTINUITY & RESILIENCE\", \"CYBERSECURITY & COMPLIANCE\"\n\n---\n\n### Section 3: Content Quality (per data row)\n\n**3.1 WHAT Column (Col D)**\n- Must describe user PAIN or problem, not technology gap\n- Flag if contains: \"platform lacks\", \"no API for\", \"system needs\"\n- Minimum 1 sentence\n\n**3.2 WHO Column (Col E)**\n- Must contain specific persona names with role context (not just \"IT Manager\")\n- For multi-segment offerings: must contain segment-specific blocks\n- Expected pattern: generic personas first, then segment blocks:\n  ```\n  Generic Persona. Maritime: [context]. Energy: [context]. ...\n  ```\n\n**3.3 WHY Column (Col F)**\n- Must contain industry context\n- Should reference regulatory pressure or market drivers where applicable\n- Flag if generic (\"important for business\")\n\n**3.4 Current Alternatives (Col G)**\n- Must list real alternatives with specific limitations\n- Flag if only says \"manual processes\" or \"no alternative\" without detail\n\n**3.5 Desired Outcome (Col H)**\n- Must be framed as user goal, not platform feature\n- Flag if starts with \"The platform...\" or \"The system...\"\n\n**3.6 Value Proposition (Col I)**\n- Must be specific promise, not generic marketing\n- Flag if lacks quantification or specificity\n\n**3.7 Business Impact (Col J)**\n- Should contain quantified impact where possible ($, %, time, hours)\n- ⚠️ WARNING (not FAIL) if no quantification — some use cases lack data\n\n**3.8 GAP Questions (Col L)**\n- Every use case must have at least 1 GAP question\n- GAP IDs must follow pattern (checked in 1.5)\n\n**3.9 Pre-Condition (Col N)**\n- If use case has cross-offering dependencies, must reference specific OFFER-XXX\n- Empty is acceptable if no dependencies\n\n**3.10 Workflow (Col O)**\n- Must describe implementation\u002Fdelivery steps\n- Minimum 2 steps\n\n**3.11 Success Criteria (Col P)**\n- Must be measurable (contains numbers, percentages, or clear pass\u002Ffail conditions)\n- Flag if purely subjective (\"users are satisfied\")\n\n---\n\n### Section 4: Remote-Site Agnostic Language\n\n**4.1 Segment-Specific Term Scan**\nScan ALL columns EXCEPT **WHO (Col E)** and **WHY (Col F)** for segment-specific terms. WHO contains segment-specific personas; WHY contains segment-specific regulatory\u002Findustry context for clarification (e.g., \"Maritime: EU ETS, CII ratings. Energy: NERC CIP\").\n\n**Maritime terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`vessel`, `ship`, `fleet` (when meaning ships), `crew`, `seafarer`, `officer` (maritime), `at sea`, `offshore` (maritime context), `onboard`, `port call`, `shore`, `shore-based`, `bridge` (ship), `man overboard`, `classification society`, `IMO`, `SOLAS`, `MARPOL`, `MLC`, `charterer`, `charter rate`, `flag state`\n\n**Energy terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`platform` (oil\u002Fgas), `rig`, `wellhead`, `drilling`, `FPSO`, `subsea`, `roughneck`, `derrick`, `NERC CIP` (unless in regulatory list), `roustabout`\n\n**Mining terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`camp` (mining), `FIFO`, `pit`, `shaft`, `headframe`, `MSHA`\n\n**Government terms** (flag if found outside WHO and WHY):\n`base` (military), `garrison`, `ITAR`, `FedRAMP`, `CMMC`, `classified`\n\n**Expected generic equivalents**:\n| Instead of | Use |\n|------------|-----|\n| vessel, ship, rig, platform, camp | remote site, distributed site |\n| crew, seafarer, roughneck | on-site personnel, workforce |\n| fleet (ships) | site portfolio, distributed sites |\n| port call | maintenance window, site visit |\n| shore, shore-based | headquarters, HQ, centralized |\n| bridge, control room (specific) | control room (generic) |\n| at sea, offshore | at remote locations |\n\n**4.2 WHO Column Segment Detail**\nVerify WHO column DOES contain segment-specific language where the use case applies to specific segments. A purely generic WHO with no segment context is a ⚠️ WARNING for multi-segment offerings.\n\n---\n\n### Section 5: Coverage Validation\n\n**5.1 Capability Coverage**\nRead the offering's capability documentation (`OFFERING_STRUCTURE.md`, `OFFER_DESCRIPTION.md`, or `SERVICE_DESIGN.md`) and list all platform capabilities. For each capability, verify at least one use case maps to it.\n\nCommon capabilities to check:\n- VM hosting \u002F compute\n- Container orchestration\n- Storage \u002F backup \u002F DR\n- Local network services (DNS, DHCP, AD)\n- Device management (MDM, patching)\n- Security (firewall, IDS, endpoint)\n- Monitoring \u002F observability\n- Database services\n- GPU \u002F AI inference (if applicable)\n- Communication tools (email, UC)\n- Edge caching \u002F CDN\n- Multi-orbit connectivity (if applicable)\n\nReport unmapped capabilities as ⚠️ WARNING with suggestion: \"Capability [X] has no mapped use case — consider whether a user need exists.\"\n\n**5.2 Segment Coverage**\nRead `10_MARLINK\u002F40_Market\u002F10_INDUSTRIES.md` or the offering's target segments. For each target segment:\n- Count use cases where segment appears in WHO column\n- Flag if a target segment has fewer than 3 use cases mentioning it\n- If a segment coverage heat map exists in `01_Offer_Hypothesis.md`, cross-reference HIGH counts\n\n**5.3 Regulatory Coverage**\nFor use cases with regulatory context in WHY column:\n- Verify specific regulation names are mentioned (not just \"regulatory compliance\")\n- Verify compliance deadlines are noted where known\n\n**5.4 Cross-Offering Boundaries**\nRead `20_OFFERS\u002F` to identify adjacent offerings. If `OFFER_BOUNDARIES.md` exists in the current offer folder, read it — boundary decisions logged there are the authoritative reference for what belongs to this offer vs. related offers. For use cases near offering boundaries:\n- Verify Pre-Condition column references the adjacent offering\n- Verify use case boundary decisions are consistent with `OFFER_BOUNDARIES.md` (if it exists)\n- Flag overlapping use cases that exist in multiple offering CSVs\n\n---\n\n### Section 6: Consistency\n\n**6.1 ID Sequencing**\nVerify IDs are sequential within domain. Gaps are ⚠️ WARNING (acceptable if intentional — e.g., deprecated use cases).\n\n**6.2 GAP ID Collision**\nRead offering's `GAPS.md`. Verify GAP IDs in CSV don't collide with existing unrelated GAPs.\n\n**6.3 Heat Map Consistency**\nIf a segment coverage heat map exists in `01_BS\u002F01_Offer_Hypothesis.md`:\n- Verify all CSV use case IDs appear in the heat map\n- Verify heat map use case IDs all exist in CSV\n- Verify category names match\n\n**6.4 Use Case Count**\nReport total use case count and count per JTBD category.\n\n---\n\n## Output Format\n\n```\n# \u002Fqa-use-cases — Validation Report\n\n**CSV**: [file path]\n**Offering**: OFFER-XXX — [Name]\n**Use Cases**: [count] across [count] JTBD categories\n**Validation Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]\n\n## Verdict: [✅ APPROVED | ⚠️ ISSUES FOUND | ❌ VALIDATION FAILED]\n\n### Section 1: Format Compliance\n- 1.1 Column Count: [✅\u002F⚠️\u002F❌] [detail]\n- 1.2 Instructional Headers: [✅\u002F⚠️\u002F❌]\n...\n\n### Section 2: JTBD Quality\n- 2.1 Category Coverage: [✅\u002F⚠️\u002F❌]\n...\n\n### Section 3: Content Quality\n[Per-row issues listed with ID and cell reference]\n\n### Section 4: Remote-Site Agnostic Language\n- 4.1 Terms Found Outside WHO:\n  - [ID] Col [X]: \"[term]\" → suggest \"[generic term]\"\n...\n\n### Section 5: Coverage\n- 5.1 Capability Coverage: [X\u002FY] capabilities mapped\n  - Unmapped: [list]\n- 5.2 Segment Coverage: [table]\n- 5.3 Regulatory Coverage: [✅\u002F⚠️]\n- 5.4 Cross-Offering: [✅\u002F⚠️]\n\n### Section 6: Consistency\n...\n\n## Summary\n- ❌ Critical: [count] (must fix)\n- ⚠️ Warnings: [count] (should fix)\n- ✅ Passed: [count]\n\n## Recommended Actions\n1. [action]\n2. [action]\n```\n\n## Verdict Rules\n\n- **✅ APPROVED**: Zero ❌ fails, ≤5 ⚠️ warnings\n- **⚠️ ISSUES FOUND**: Zero ❌ fails, >5 ⚠️ warnings\n- **❌ VALIDATION FAILED**: Any ❌ fail present\n\n## Important\n\n- You are READ-ONLY. Never modify files.\n- Report specific cell references (e.g., \"EDGE.5, Col D\" or \"Row 12, Col G\").\n- Do not invent data — if you can't read a context file, note it as \"Context unavailable\" and skip that check.\n- Be strict on format (Section 1) and language (Section 4). Be pragmatic on content quality (Section 3) — flag but don't fail for minor issues.\n",{"name":5,"model":57,"context":39,"description":58,"allowed-tools":59,"argument-hint":60,"disable-model-invocation":61},"sonnet","Validates Use Cases CSV format compliance, JTBD quality, content completeness, remote-site agnostic language, capability\u002Fsegment coverage, and cross-document consistency. Use after creating or updating a Use Cases CSV.\n","Read, Glob, Grep, mcp__hindsight__recall","[csv-file-path]",true,"master","f57cddf3a79f076c1bb1ba9c187850fba797c0c9","skills\u002Fqa-use-cases",1,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.linkedin.com\u002Fin\u002Framirezarturo\u002F","Geek by birth, with not much to say but plenty to talk about.","2026-09-25 20:04:26",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":72,"prompt":82,"zipAvailable":61},[73,76,79],{"tool":74,"command":75},"npx","npx skills add Wizarck\u002Fnexandro --skill qa-use-cases",{"tool":77,"command":78},"bunx","bunx skills add Wizarck\u002Fnexandro --skill qa-use-cases",{"tool":80,"command":81},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add Wizarck\u002Fnexandro --skill qa-use-cases","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fqa-use-cases\u002FSKILL.md",[],[85,113,136,158,171,196],{"skillNo":86,"name":87,"nameZh":6,"description":88,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":89,"categories":90,"keywords":95,"publishedAt":52},"01M71BBM78XJY2YXFXJ2YNCEGY","xlsx","Use this skill any time a spreadsheet file is the primary input or output. This means any task where the user wants to: open, read, edit, or fix an existing .xlsx, .xlsm, .csv, or .tsv file; create a new spreadsheet from scratch or from other data sources; or convert between tabular file formats. Trigger especially when the user references a spreadsheet file by name or path and wants something done to it or produced from it. Also trigger for cleaning or restructuring messy tabular data files into proper spreadsheets.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fxlsx\u002FSKILL.md",[91,92],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":93,"categoryName":94,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000034","行政与办公人员",[87,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,32,108,109,110,111,42,112],"sources","tsv","by name","for","spreadsheet","time","trigger","fix","scratch","open","new","files","Existing","when","done","convert","tabular",{"skillNo":114,"name":115,"nameZh":6,"description":116,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":117,"categories":118,"keywords":123,"publishedAt":52},"01M71BBGZJG2FKCPJZWR32SCZ5","use-case-research","Creates JTBD-aligned Use Cases CSVs through structured user interviews, parallel vendor\u002Findustry research, and Jobs-to-be-Done synthesis. Generates 17-column CSV (OFFER-001 format) and validates with \u002Fqa-use-cases. Use when creating or updating use case research for an offering.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fuse-case-research\u002FSKILL.md",[119,122],{"categoryNo":120,"categoryName":121,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000021","资料检索与研究",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[124,32,125,126,127,128,34,43,109,110,129,130,36,131,132,133,134,135,99,47],"use case research","case","research","industry research","user interviews","Bash","websearch","write","edit","interviews","opus","parallel",{"skillNo":137,"name":138,"nameZh":6,"description":139,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":140,"categories":141,"keywords":143,"publishedAt":52},"01M71BBCCGXCBJZSYK72CT7MJW","sync-jira","Two-way sync between PROGRESS.md pipeline status and JIRA CIT tasks. Use when syncing offering progress with JIRA, checking JIRA status, bootstrapping JIRA tasks for new offerings, or pushing\u002Fpulling status updates. Also use when the user mentions JIRA, CIT tasks, or pipeline sync.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fsync-jira\u002FSKILL.md",[142],{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[144,145,146,147,148,99,149,150,106,45,32,109,151,129,152,153,154,155,156,157],"sync jira","jira","sync","pull","push","pipeline","status updates","updates","tasks","bootstrap","dry","two","with","id",{"skillNo":159,"name":160,"nameZh":6,"description":161,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":162,"categories":163,"keywords":165,"publishedAt":52},"01M71BBAV2F4ABBVAM9FMZ692C","strategy","Tunes business strategy and aligns with corporate ABC Goals. Use when working on 01_BS\u002F business strategy files.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fstrategy\u002FSKILL.md",[164],{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[160,47,107,32,166,109,156,157,167,168,36,131,132,169,170,57],"business","goals","business strategy","corporate","grep",{"skillNo":172,"name":173,"nameZh":6,"description":174,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":175,"categories":176,"keywords":181,"publishedAt":52},"01M71BB6N1EJDAMAWAF0FSGFRR","start","Starts the full MCP stack: LiteLLM proxy + Docker services (Hindsight, Atlassian, Google Workspace) + skills-manager + notebooklm. All services connect directly — no proxy. Use \u002Fstart at the beginning of any session where MCP tools are needed, or when any service is stopped. LiteLLM must start before Docker — Hindsight depends on it at startup.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fstart\u002FSKILL.md",[177,180],{"categoryNo":178,"categoryName":179,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000011","运维与部署",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[173,50,182,183,184,185,186,45,32,187,109,129,188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195],"google workspace","proxy","docker","session","litellm","connect","stack","haiku","services","workspace","at","notebooklm","google","startup",{"skillNo":197,"name":198,"nameZh":6,"description":199,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":200,"categories":201,"keywords":203,"publishedAt":52},"01M71BB50307CW202PCTECJ3BB","start-palafito","Úsalo cuando el usuario quiere arrancar el stack palafito-prod (Paperclip) y, si hace falta, levantar Docker Desktop antes.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FWizarck\u002Fnexandro\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fstart-palafito\u002FSKILL.md",[202],{"categoryNo":178,"categoryName":179,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[173,204,188,205,39,206,129,184,57],"start palafito","desktop","paperclip"]