Review a quality plan

A useful quality plan says what to check, against which requirement, how to check it and what happens to the result. Start with the product revision and the founder’s priorities. A cheaper quote cannot replace a required fit, material or functional result.

The quality_plan action prepares inspection points, sample approval gates and pack-out checks. Your existing engineering and quality systems hold the approved plan, measurement records and release decision.

1. Identify the requirement and its evidence

Use the permitted drawing, BOM, requirements and test records already available to your agent. Keep the exact revision and source beside each requirement. Where a limit or method is missing, state the gap explicitly.

Record	Example of information to carry forward
Characteristic	A specific dimension, material, fit, function or packaging requirement
Acceptance criterion	The released limit or approved reference, including units
Method	Measurement or test procedure, equipment and required conditions
Coverage	Which units, lot or process stage the check applies to
Evidence	Report, measured values, serial/lot identity and tested revision
Decision	Who accepts the result and how a failure or exception is handled

“Good surface finish” needs a shared acceptance reference. “Fits the assembly” needs an agreed assembly and method. Keep proposed criteria separate from released requirements. The model should not supply a missing numerical tolerance from a similar product.

2. Request the draft

The synthetic quality request continues the 100-enclosure example. It preserves unapproved material, missing tolerances and missing acceptance evidence.

maglev actions request PROJECT_ID \
  --input examples/agent-project/quality.json \
  --idempotency-key example-revision-a-quality-001 --json

Supply the actual batch quantity in unitsPerBatch, known requirements and gaps in criticalToQuality, and the packaging basis in packaging. These fields contain text and numbers, not attachments. A filename is a source reference; it does not upload a drawing or test report. See the input schema.

Check action.status before reading action.output.result. A result with draft_ready is ready for review. After an interrupted request, retrieve the saved action before creating replacement work.

3. Review the inspection points

For each inspectionPoints entry, check what, method and sampling against the actual requirement. The stage codes mean:

Code	Stage
iqc	Incoming quality control: received materials and parts
ipqc	In-process quality control: checks during manufacture or assembly
fqc	Final quality control: the finished product
oqc	Outgoing quality control: release for shipment
psi	Pre-shipment inspection: the agreed shipment inspection scope

Stages can overlap. Assign a check where its result can support the intended decision, rather than repeating it under every label. Identify destructive tests separately: a tested unit may no longer be available to ship. Confirm the responsible reviewer and required records outside the generated schema if those details are absent.

4. Resolve the sampling plan

Acceptance sampling uses a defined sample and decision rule to accept or reject a lot. Its purpose is lot disposition; it does not establish that every item conforms. NIST’s acceptance-sampling overview.

Ask the responsible quality engineer to identify the lot definition, sample size, selection method, acceptance/rejection rule and applicable standard or agreed procedure. The risk of accepting an unsuitable lot or rejecting a suitable one depends on the chosen plan and its assumptions. An AQL label or lot size alone is insufficient. NIST’s sampling-plan guidance.

Review aqlSuggestion.level and aqlSuggestion.note as generated text. The current API does not calculate or validate a sampling plan’s statistical risks. Its fixed small-lot caveat is not a basis for discarding sampling or approving a lot. Retain an unresolved level as unknown until the responsible reviewer selects the plan.

5. Tie samples and packaging to the revision

Use goldenSampleGate to identify what an approved reference sample must demonstrate and the revision it represents. Record the actual sample identity and accepted characteristics. A reference sample for appearance does not establish every dimension, functional result or regulatory requirement.

Review packOutChecks against the agreed contents, labeling, protection and traceability requirements. Keep untested packaging assumptions in openQuestions. A generated check is a planned activity; attach or identify its result when the activity is completed.

6. Preserve the release decision

Resolve assumptions and openQuestions with the responsible engineer, factory or lab. The result’s sources identify grounding passages; they are not inspection reports for your lot.

Keep the approved plan, actual results, exceptions and decision owner with the project revision. When the design or acceptance basis changes, update the brief and request a new draft under a new idempotency key. Use the readiness review to identify remaining gaps before the next build, and quote review to check whether the supplier’s price includes the agreed inspection work.