build(packaging): add .skill/.zip artifacts, bundle, and packages index

package/PACKAGES_INDEX.md

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+# PACKAGES INDEX
+
+- Generated: 2026-03-19 13:49:16 UTC
+- Skills root: `/home/davide/cev-skills/skill`
+- Valid skills packaged: 34
+- Package formats: `.skill` + `.zip` (per skill)
+- Bundle: `mechanical-skills-collection.zip`
+- Validation status: PASS
+
+## Included Skills
+
+- `bearings-seals-selection` (source dir: `bearings-seals-selection`, declared name: `bearings-seals-selection`)
+- `calculation-report` (source dir: `calculation-report`, declared name: `calculation-report`)
+- `cnc-sheet-casting-forging` (source dir: `cnc-sheet-casting-forging`, declared name: `cnc-sheet-casting-forging`)
+- `design-review-fmea` (source dir: `design-review-fmea`, declared name: `design-review-fmea`)
+- `dfm-dfa-review` (source dir: `dfm-dfa-review`, declared name: `dfm-dfa-review`)
+- `dynamics-vibrations-analysis` (source dir: `dynamics-vibrations-analysis`, declared name: `dynamics-vibrations-analysis`)
+- `energy-efficiency-analysis` (source dir: `energy-efficiency-analysis`, declared name: `energy-efficiency-analysis`)
+- `failure-root-cause-analysis` (source dir: `failure-root-cause-analysis`, declared name: `failure-root-cause-analysis`)
+- `fatigue-fracture-analysis` (source dir: `fatigue-fracture-analysis`, declared name: `fatigue-fracture-analysis`)
+- `fea-cfd-review` (source dir: `fea-cfd-review`, declared name: `fea-cfd-review`)
+- `fluid-analysis` (source dir: `fluid-analysis`, declared name: `fluid-analysis`)
+- `gear-design` (source dir: `gear-design`, declared name: `gear-design`)
+- `heat-treatment` (source dir: `heat-treatment`, declared name: `heat-treatment`)
+- `joints-design` (source dir: `joints-design`, declared name: `joints-design`)
+- `machine-elements-selection` (source dir: `machine-elements-selection`, declared name: `machine-elements-selection`)
+- `material-failure-modes` (source dir: `material-failure-modes`, declared name: `material-failure-modes`)
+- `materials-metallurgy` (source dir: `materials-metallurgy`, declared name: `materials-metallurgy`)
+- `mechanical-orchestrator` (source dir: `mechanical-orchestrator`, declared name: `mechanical-orchestrator`)
+- `modal-analysis` (source dir: `modal-analysis`, declared name: `modal-analysis`)
+- `pressure-loss-pump-piping` (source dir: `pressure-loss-pump-piping`, declared name: `pressure-loss-pump-piping`)
+- `process-selection` (source dir: `process-selection`, declared name: `process-selection`)
+- `quality-metrology-plan` (source dir: `quality-metrology-plan`, declared name: `quality-metrology-plan`)
+- `reliability-analysis` (source dir: `reliability-analysis`, declared name: `reliability-analysis`)
+- `shafts-couplings-design` (source dir: `shafts-couplings-design`, declared name: `shafts-couplings-design`)
+- `should-cost-estimation` (source dir: `should-cost-estimation`, declared name: `should-cost-estimation`)
+- `spring-design` (source dir: `spring-design`, declared name: `spring-design`)
+- `standards-compliance-check` (source dir: `standards-compliance-check`, declared name: `standards-compliance-check`)
+- `structural-analysis` (source dir: `structural-analysis`, declared name: `structural-analysis`)
+- `technical-report` (source dir: `technical-report`, declared name: `technical-report`)
+- `test-plan-validation` (source dir: `test-plan-validation`, declared name: `test-plan-validation`)
+- `thermal-analysis` (source dir: `thermal-analysis`, declared name: `thermal-analysis`)
+- `thermal-expansion-stress` (source dir: `thermal-expansion-stress`, declared name: `thermal-expansion-stress`)
+- `tolerance-gdt-fits` (source dir: `tolerance-gdt-fits`, declared name: `tolerance-gdt-fits`)
+- `tribology-lubrication` (source dir: `tribology-lubrication`, declared name: `tribology-lubrication`)
+
+## Warnings
+
+- None
+
+## Skipped
+
+- None
+
+## Validation
+
+- [x] package count check: expected 68, found 68
+- [x] bearings-seals-selection.skill: OK
+- [x] bearings-seals-selection.zip: OK
+- [x] calculation-report.skill: OK
+- [x] calculation-report.zip: OK
+- [x] cnc-sheet-casting-forging.skill: OK
+- [x] cnc-sheet-casting-forging.zip: OK
+- [x] bundle contains all valid skill directories
+
+## Output Paths
+
+- `packages/per-skill/`
+- `packages/bundles/`

package/upload-md/bearings-seals-selection.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: bearings-seals-selection
+description: Bearing and seal selection for rotating equipment. Use this skill whenever the user asks about bearing type/life, preload, lubrication, sealing, contamination control, or shaft support architecture.
+---
+
+# Bearings And Seals Selection
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+choose bearing-seal architecture and life strategy.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- equivalent load and life model
+- fits/preload thermal effects
+- contamination ingress risk
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/calculation-report.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: calculation-report
+description: Calculation report preparation for auditable engineering calculations. Use this skill whenever the user needs formal calculation packs with equations, assumptions, units, and compliance-ready traceability.
+---
+
+# Calculation Report
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+produce auditable calculation packages with full traceability.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- equation/source traceability
+- unit discipline and numerical reproducibility
+- independent-check checklist
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/cnc-sheet-casting-forging.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: cnc-sheet-casting-forging
+description: Detailed manufacturing guidance for CNC machining, sheet metal, casting, and forging. Use this skill whenever the user requests geometry rules, draft/radii, tool access, or redesign for a specific process family.
+---
+
+# CNC Sheet Casting Forging Guidance
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+convert part geometry into process-specific design rules.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- process-specific geometric constraints
+- allowance and stock strategy
+- distortion and shrinkage controls
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/design-review-fmea.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: design-review-fmea
+description: Structured design review and FMEA for risk reduction. Use this skill whenever the user asks for design review checklists, failure prevention planning, or prioritization of design risks before release.
+---
+
+# Design Review And FMEA
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+run risk-driven design review and mitigation prioritization.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- function-failure-effect linkage
+- severity/occurrence/detection rationale
+- closure evidence for actions
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/dfm-dfa-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: dfm-dfa-review
+description: Design for manufacturing and assembly review for mechanical products. Use this skill whenever the user asks if a design is producible/assemblable, wants part-count reduction, or needs robust assembly flow.
+---
+
+# DFM DFA Review
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+improve producibility, assembly robustness, and cost-to-build.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- feature-process compatibility
+- assembly sequence robustness
+- mistake-proofing opportunities
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/dynamics-vibrations-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: dynamics-vibrations-analysis
+description: Rigid-body dynamics and vibration response analysis. Use this skill whenever the user asks about motion, acceleration loads, resonance, transmissibility, balancing, or dynamic amplification in machines.
+---
+
+# Dynamics And Vibrations Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+assess dynamic loads and vibration response.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- natural frequency separation
+- damping assumptions
+- transient shock and harmonic response checks
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/energy-efficiency-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: energy-efficiency-analysis
+description: Energy efficiency optimization for mechanical and thermo-fluid systems. Use this skill whenever the user wants to reduce energy consumption, compare efficiency options, or evaluate lifecycle energy impact of design choices.
+---
+
+# Energy Efficiency Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+quantify losses and rank efficiency improvements.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- loss tree by subsystem
+- operating-point sensitivity
+- payback-oriented prioritization
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/failure-root-cause-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: failure-root-cause-analysis
+description: Root cause analysis for field or test failures in mechanical systems. Use this skill whenever the user asks why a failure happened, needs 5-Why/fishbone evidence, or must define corrective actions.
+---
+
+# Failure Root Cause Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+isolate root causes and define corrective/preventive actions.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- evidence chain integrity
+- competing hypothesis elimination
+- verification of corrective actions
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/fatigue-fracture-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: fatigue-fracture-analysis
+description: Fatigue life and fracture risk assessment for cyclic loading. Use this skill whenever the user mentions S-N life, crack growth, endurance, variable amplitude cycles, weld fatigue, or brittle/ductile fracture concerns, even if test data is limited.
+---
+
+# Fatigue And Fracture Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+estimate durability and crack risk for cyclic duty.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- cycle counting assumptions
+- mean stress correction
+- damage accumulation and inspection interval
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/fea-cfd-review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: fea-cfd-review
+description: Critical review of FEA/CFD models and simulation credibility. Use this skill whenever the user asks to validate simulation setup/results, challenge assumptions, or decide if analysis is decision-ready.
+---
+
+# FEA CFD Review
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+audit simulation credibility before design decisions.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- mesh/boundary-condition adequacy
+- model validation against hand checks
+- decision-readiness criteria
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/fluid-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: fluid-analysis
+description: Internal and external fluid flow analysis for engineering systems. Use this skill whenever the user asks about flow rate, pressure drop, Reynolds regime, valve/piping behavior, or fluid-system sizing.
+---
+
+# Fluid Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+evaluate flow regime and pressure-flow performance.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- compressible vs incompressible assumptions
+- loss coefficient breakdown
+- cavitation and NPSH risk
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/gear-design.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: gear-design
+description: Gear train design and verification for power transmission. Use this skill whenever the user asks about gear geometry, ratio selection, tooth stresses, micropitting/scuffing, or gearbox design tradeoffs.
+---
+
+# Gear Design
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+size and verify gears for strength, life, and efficiency.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- macro/micro geometry impacts
+- contact and bending stress margins
+- lubrication and thermal interaction
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/heat-treatment.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: heat-treatment
+description: Heat-treatment strategy for steels and alloys in mechanical design. Use this skill whenever the user asks about hardening, tempering, case depth, residual stresses, distortion, or hardness-toughness tradeoffs.
+---
+
+# Heat Treatment
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+define heat-treatment route tied to function and manufacturability.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- microstructure target by function
+- distortion and crack risk controls
+- verification plan for hardness/case depth
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/joints-design.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: joints-design
+description: Joint design for bolts, welds, adhesives, and hybrid joints. Use this skill whenever the user asks how to join parts or verify joint integrity under static, fatigue, thermal, or corrosive conditions.
+---
+
+# Joints Design
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+select and verify joining method and joint sizing.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- load path through joint stackup
+- slip/leak/fatigue criteria
+- assembly process sensitivity
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/machine-elements-selection.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: machine-elements-selection
+description: Integrated selection of machine elements for a mechanism or subsystem. Use this skill whenever the user asks to choose among bearings/gears/springs/joints/couplings under constraints of reliability, cost, and manufacturability.
+---
+
+# Machine Elements Selection
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+compare machine-element architectures and select justified configuration.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- multi-criteria trade study
+- interface compatibility checks
+- obsolescence and sourcing risk
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/material-failure-modes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: material-failure-modes
+description: Material failure mode identification and prevention. Use this skill whenever the user asks about yielding, brittle fracture, creep, wear, corrosion-assisted cracking, or unexplained material degradation.
+---
+
+# Material Failure Modes
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+identify dominant failure mechanisms and controls.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- mechanism ranking by evidence
+- threshold conditions
+- preventive design/process controls
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/materials-metallurgy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: materials-metallurgy
+description: Materials engineering and metallurgy guidance for design decisions. Use this skill whenever the user asks to choose metals/polymers/composites, compare material behavior, or evaluate metallurgical effects on performance.
+---
+
+# Materials And Metallurgy
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+select materials using performance, process, and risk criteria.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- temperature/environment compatibility
+- anisotropy and processing state effects
+- data confidence from sources
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/mechanical-orchestrator.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: mechanical-orchestrator
+description: Cross-domain mechanical engineering orchestration for complex design questions. Use this skill whenever a request spans multiple domains (stress, fatigue, thermal, fluid, materials, manufacturing, reliability), whenever requirements are incomplete, or whenever the user asks for a senior-level decision path and prioritization, even if they do not ask for an orchestrator explicitly.
+---
+
+# Mechanical Orchestrator
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+build a scoped decision flow across mechanics, materials, manufacturing, validation, and documentation.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- load-path decomposition
+- cross-domain dependency map
+- decision checkpoints with go/no-go criteria
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/modal-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: modal-analysis
+description: Modal behavior assessment for structures and assemblies. Use this skill whenever the user asks for mode shapes, eigenfrequencies, modal participation, or resonance avoidance strategies in design.
+---
+
+# Modal Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+identify modal risks and mitigation actions.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- mass/stiffness idealization quality
+- mode participation relevance
+- frequency margin to excitations
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/pressure-loss-pump-piping.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: pressure-loss-pump-piping
+description: Hydraulic network design including pressure losses, pumps, and piping. Use this skill whenever the user asks about line sizing, head losses, pump selection, NPSH, or piping layout effects.
+---
+
+# Pressure Loss Pump And Piping
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+size piping and pumping system at required duty.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- system curve construction
+- NPSH/cavitation margin
+- control valve authority checks
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/process-selection.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: process-selection
+description: Manufacturing process selection across machining, forming, casting, additive, and joining. Use this skill whenever the user asks which process should be used for a part under cost, tolerance, volume, and material constraints.
+---
+
+# Process Selection
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+select manufacturing route with explicit tradeoffs.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- volume-breakpoint logic
+- capability vs tolerance mapping
+- tooling and lead-time implications
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/quality-metrology-plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: quality-metrology-plan
+description: Quality control and metrology planning for mechanical parts and assemblies. Use this skill whenever the user asks how to inspect, validate, or control critical characteristics in production.
+---
+
+# Quality And Metrology Plan
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+define measurable CTQs and inspection strategy.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- measurement system capability
+- sampling and control plan logic
+- gauge and datum accessibility
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/reliability-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: reliability-analysis
+description: Reliability engineering for mechanical products and systems. Use this skill whenever the user asks about reliability targets, MTBF, warranty risk, mission profiles, or reliability growth plans.
+---
+
+# Reliability Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+quantify reliability and propose risk-reduction plan.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- mission profile decomposition
+- series/parallel logic appropriateness
+- confidence bounds on predictions
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/shafts-couplings-design.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: shafts-couplings-design
+description: Shaft and coupling design for torque and alignment demands. Use this skill whenever the user asks about shaft sizing, keyways/splines, critical speed, misalignment, or coupling selection.
+---
+
+# Shafts And Couplings Design
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+design shafts and couplings against static, fatigue, and dynamic limits.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- combined loading with stress raisers
+- critical speed margin
+- connection failure checks
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/should-cost-estimation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: should-cost-estimation
+description: Should-cost and cost-driver analysis for mechanical components. Use this skill whenever the user asks for target cost, quote sanity check, supplier negotiation inputs, or cost reduction options.
+---
+
+# Should Cost Estimation
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+estimate cost structure and cost-down levers.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- cost model assumptions traceability
+- sensitivity to volume/scrap/cycle time
+- risk-adjusted ranges
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/spring-design.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: spring-design
+description: Spring design for force-deflection and life requirements. Use this skill whenever the user asks about coil/leaf/disc spring sizing, stiffness tuning, set relaxation, or cycle life.
+---
+
+# Spring Design
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+design springs for force window, envelope, and durability.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- stress correction factors
+- solid height and buckling checks
+- set and relaxation allowances
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/standards-compliance-check.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: standards-compliance-check
+description: Engineering standards and compliance guidance for mechanical products. Use this skill whenever the user asks about ISO/EN/ASME/ASTM/API/NACE requirements, legal/contractual compliance checks, certification readiness, or design acceptability against standards, even if standard names are only partially known.
+---
+
+# Standards And Compliance Check
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+map requirements to applicable standards and evidence packages.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- normative scope mapping
+- mandatory vs optional clauses
+- compliance evidence matrix
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/structural-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: structural-analysis
+description: Solid mechanics analysis for parts and assemblies under static loads. Use this skill whenever the user asks for stress, strain, deflection, stiffness, load paths, or structural adequacy checks for mechanical components, even if geometry is incomplete.
+---
+
+# Structural Analysis
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+evaluate stresses, strains, and stiffness under real load cases.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- equilibrium and boundary conditions
+- stress concentration handling
+- deflection/serviceability limits
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/technical-report.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: technical-report
+description: Technical report writing for mechanical engineering deliverables. Use this skill whenever the user needs a clear, professional engineering report with rationale, findings, and recommendations for stakeholders.
+---
+
+# Technical Report
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+produce concise, evidence-based engineering reports.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- executive clarity for mixed audiences
+- evidence-to-claim traceability
+- decision-oriented recommendations
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.

package/upload-md/test-plan-validation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: test-plan-validation
+description: Test planning and validation strategy for mechanical design verification. Use this skill whenever the user asks how to verify requirements, design tests, set acceptance criteria, or plan DV/PV campaigns.
+---
+
+# Test Plan Validation
+
+## Objective
+Deliver senior-level mechanical engineering support for this domain with transparent assumptions, standards-aware reasoning, and decision-oriented outputs.
+
+## Focus
+build requirement-linked verification plan.
+
+## Required Inputs
+Collect and state these inputs before final recommendations:
+- Functional objective and acceptance criteria.
+- Geometry, interfaces, and boundary conditions.
+- Load cases and duty cycle (magnitude, direction, duration, repetitions).
+- Material state, manufacturing route, and environment (temperature, corrosion, contamination).
+- Applicable standards, customer constraints, and safety expectations.
+
+If data is missing, proceed with bounded assumptions and clearly mark uncertainty impact.
+
+## Workflow
+1. Frame the engineering question and define pass/fail metrics.
+2. Build a first-principles model and choose methods suitable for the available fidelity.
+3. Cross-check with standards, supplier datasheets, and recognized references.
+4. Compare at least two options when tradeoffs are relevant.
+5. Quantify margins, sensitivities, and residual risks.
+6. Conclude with a practical recommendation and next validation step.
+
+## Specialized Checks
+Prioritize these checks in the analysis:
+- requirement-to-test traceability
+- test severity and representativeness
+- pass/fail criteria robustness
+
+## Sources Priority
+Use and cite sources in this order:
+1. Binding standards/codes and contractual requirements.
+2. OEM or supplier technical documentation.
+3. Peer-reviewed literature and recognized handbooks.
+4. Internal lessons learned and field evidence.
+
+When sources disagree, explain which source controls the decision and why.
+
+## Output Format
+ALWAYS use this structure:
+
+# Engineering Response
+## 1. Problem Framing
+## 2. Inputs And Assumptions
+## 3. Analysis And Checks
+## 4. Design Options And Tradeoffs
+## 5. Risks, Failure Modes, And Mitigations
+## 6. Recommendation And Next Actions
+## 7. Sources Consulted
+
+## Quality Gates
+Before finalizing, verify all of the following:
+- SI units are consistent and conversions are explicit.
+- At least one sanity check exists (order-of-magnitude or handbook benchmark).
+- Utilization, margin, or safety factor is reported where applicable.
+- Limitations and confidence level are stated.
+- Cases requiring human expert sign-off or physical testing are clearly flagged.