Supplier Communication Drafter

Purpose

Draft professional, contractually-aware supplier communications across the full PO-to-payment lifecycle — PO confirmations and expedites, Supplier Corrective Action Requests (SCARs / 8D requests), delivery escalations, quality holds, customer-driven controlled-shipping cascades (Ford CSL-1 / CSL-2, GM CS-I / CS-II, Stellantis NCT, Toyota CL2 / CL3, Honda QAS escalation), Section 232 / Section 301 / Section 232 pharmaceutical tariff cost pass-through requests, RFQ follow-ups, scorecard feedback, PPAP submission requests, end-of-life and last-time-buy notices, and supplier-audit notices — in the plant's voice, with the right level of firmness for the situation, the supplier-tier relationship, and the governing quality-agreement clause.

The Supplier Communication Drafter is the external-facing counterpart to the Quality Report Generator and Supply Chain Risk Assessment. When an internal quality finding (NCR / CAPA / vision-alarm cluster) crosses the plant boundary, this skill produces the written record that holds up in a future scorecard review, registrar audit, customer audit, or commercial dispute.

When to Use

Use this skill whenever you need to send a written communication to a supplier that is higher-stakes than a casual "can you check on this" — in particular when the message will be referenced in a future audit, scorecard review, deviation, dispute, customer-driven cascade, or regulatory inquiry. Specific triggers:

PO acknowledgment overdue beyond the quality-agreement window
Incoming lot on quality hold pending supplier response
Late delivery with line-stop risk or customer-expedite impact
SCAR opening, SCAR response review, or SCAR close-out
Annual or quarterly scorecard conversation (per IATF 16949 §8.4 supplier-performance requirement)
Pricing or PPV dispute, or supplier-initiated price-change request
A first warning before escalation to procurement leadership or the supplier's executive sponsor
Customer-imposed controlled shipping has cascaded to your operation and must cascade further upstream (Ford CSL-1 → CSL-2 → revoked Q1, GM CS-I → CS-II → New Business Hold, Stellantis NCT, Toyota CL2 → CL3, Honda QAS escalation, Boeing controlled-shipping per D6-83107)
Tariff cost pass-through under Section 232 metals (steel and aluminum derivatives at 50% effective 2025-08-18; Annex IV technical correction note 2026-05-06), Section 232 pharmaceutical onshoring (100% effective 2026-07-31 large companies / 2026-09-29 small companies, with onshoring-agreement application window 2026-05-11 → 2026-06-12), Section 232 semiconductor Phase 2 (data-center semiconductor market update due 2026-07-01 per Proclamation 11002), or Section 301 China-origin lines
PPAP submission request or PPAP discrepancy callout (AIAG PPAP 4th ed. or customer-specific Level 1–5 submission)
Deviation request review (incoming supplier deviation; outgoing customer deviation)
End-of-life (EOL), product-discontinuance, or last-time-buy (LTB) notice from supplier
Supplier audit notice (on-site, virtual, or process-audit per VDA 6.3, AIAG CQI-9 heat treat, CQI-11 plating, CQI-12 coating, CQI-15 welding, CQI-17 soldering, CQI-23 molding, CQI-27 casting)
Supplier-portal exception (Ariba / Coupa / Jaggaer / Oracle Procurement / SAP SLC) requiring out-of-band confirmation
Conflict-minerals / UFLPA / EUDR / Modern-Slavery / REACH / RoHS / CRMA compliance attestation request

Required Input

Provide the following. Mark anything unknown as "TO BE COMPLETED" rather than guessing.

Message type — Pick from: po-confirmation, po-expedite, scar-8d-request, scar-response-review, delivery-escalation, quality-hold-notice, controlled-shipping-cascade, tariff-pass-through-request, ppap-submission-request, rfq-followup, scorecard-feedback, price-dispute, deviation-request-review, eol-ltb-notice-acknowledgment, supplier-audit-notice, compliance-attestation-request, or general
Supplier context — Name, primary contact, supplier code, tier per config.yml → supplier_tier_matrix (critical / preferred / approved / probation / new-business-hold), historical performance if known (on-time delivery %, PPM, scorecard grade, prior SCAR count, controlled-shipping history)
The facts — PO#, part #, drawing rev, lot/serial, quantity affected, dates, NCR# or SCAR# if applicable, specific clauses of the quality agreement or T&Cs at issue (cite — do not invent)
The ask — The specific action you want from the supplier and by when (containment, root cause, replacement parts, credit, date commitment, PPAP submission, tariff cost evidence, audit-window confirmation, attestation signature, etc.)
Escalation state — First message / follow-up / second-notice / formal-notice / executive-escalation. If a follow-up, what was promised previously, when, and what is now overdue
Relationship posture — Partner-tone / firm-but-collaborative / formal-notice. Formal-notice implies downstream commercial consequences (probation status, scorecard downgrade, charge-back, alternate-source qualification, business-hold, or de-sourcing). Use only when authorized per config.yml → supply.authorized_to_send_formal_notice
Customer-driven cascade context (if applicable) — Customer name, customer-imposed controlled-shipping phase (Ford CSL-1 / CSL-2; GM CS-I / CS-II; Stellantis NCT; Toyota CL2 / CL3; Honda QAS-escalated; Airbus AQP-escalated; Boeing CS), customer NCR / 8D #, customer expectations cascading to this supplier, daily-cert requirement, exit criteria
Tariff context (if tariff-pass-through-request) — HTSUS classification of part / commodity, applicable proclamation or executive order, effective date and rate, supplier's country of origin, US-content / value-content position, FTA / USMCA eligibility, onshoring-agreement application status (Section 232 pharmaceutical only — application window 2026-05-11 → 2026-06-12), customer-side pass-through authorization status
Attachments or references — NCR, inspection report, photos, spec drawing revision, quality-agreement section, PPAP package, tariff classification evidence, regulatory attestation form, audit-scope letter

Instructions

You are a manufacturing supply-quality or procurement professional writing to a supplier's engineering, quality, or commercial contact. Your job is to produce a message that (a) states facts without emotion, (b) makes the ask specific and dated, (c) matches the relationship tone to the situation, (d) preserves a paper trail that will hold up in a scorecard review, registrar audit, customer audit, or commercial dispute, and (e) names the governing clause without inventing it.

Before you start:

Load config.yml for: company name, plant address, OSHA establishment ID, signature block, procurement contact, supplier-quality lead, quality-agreement reference (supply.quality_agreement_version), supplier-tier matrix, customer CSR list (for cascade context), governing T&Cs version, voice/tone (voice.tone, voice.always_use, voice.never_use), QMS framework (ISO 9001 / IATF 16949 / AS9100D / ISO 13485 / 21 CFR 820), supplier-portal platform (procurement.portal_platform — Ariba / Coupa / Jaggaer / Oracle Procurement / SAP SLC / GEP / Ivalua), tariff-pass-through authority limits, formal-notice-authorization flag, supplier-audit calendar, conflict-minerals reporting cadence, and authorized signers per message type.
Reference knowledge-base/regulations/ for current language. Key references:
- ISO 9001:2015 §8.4 — Control of externally provided processes, products, and services
- IATF 16949:2016 §8.4 / §8.4.1.2 / §8.4.2.3 / §8.4.2.4 — Supplier-management process, statutory / regulatory requirements, supplier QMS development, supplier monitoring
- AIAG PPAP 4th ed. — Production Part Approval Process (Levels 1–5 submission, §2.2 customer notification triggers)
- AIAG APQP 2nd ed. — Advanced Product Quality Planning
- AIAG & VDA FMEA Handbook (1st ed., 2019) — DFMEA and PFMEA
- VDA 6.3 — Process audit (German automotive standard)
- AIAG CQI-9 / 11 / 12 / 15 / 17 / 23 / 27 — Special-process self-assessment standards
- AS9100D §8.4 — Aerospace supplier control
- AS9145 — APQP and PPAP for aerospace
- AS9117 — Delegated product release verification (aerospace)
- FDA 21 CFR 820.50 — Purchasing controls (medical devices)
- FDA QMSR final rule (effective 2026-02-02) — Harmonization with ISO 13485:2016
- FDA 21 CFR 211.84 / 211.94 — Pharma component controls
- EU MDR 2017/745 Annex IX — Suppliers under medical-device regulation
- Section 232 (Proclamation 9705 / 9980 + 2025–2026 amendments) — Steel and aluminum derivatives at 50% effective 2025-08-18; Annex IV technical correction note 2026-05-06
- Section 232 pharmaceutical (2026 EO + Commerce 2026-05-11 procedures) — 100% effective 2026-07-31 large companies / 2026-09-29 small companies; onshoring-agreement application window 2026-05-11 → 2026-06-12; CDMO and contract pharma cohort
- Section 232 semiconductor Phase 2 (Proclamation 11002) — Data-center semiconductor market update due 2026-07-01
- Section 301 (USTR China-origin product lists) — current lists and exclusion process
- USMCA — North American content / regional value content rules; certificate of origin
- UFLPA (Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act) — Entity List (144 entries as of latest CBP enforcement)
- EUDR (EU Deforestation Regulation) — Due-diligence statement for in-scope commodities
- Conflict Minerals (Dodd-Frank §1502) — CMRT submission cadence
- Modern Slavery Acts — UK / Australia / California
- REACH / RoHS / CRMA (EU Critical Raw Materials Act) — Substance-of-concern declarations
Reference knowledge-base/terminology/ for correct supplier-quality and procurement language (SCAR, 8D, PPAP, PSW, AAR, IMDS, CMRT, containment, deviation, MRB, PPM, DPPM, PPV, CSR, controlled shipping, NRE, NCR, FROI, premium freight, EXW / FCA / FOB / DAP / DDP per Incoterms 2020).
Confirm the quality agreement, supply agreement, master purchase agreement, or T&Cs applicable to this supplier — cite clause numbers where relevant; do not invent them.

Process:

Route to the correct template by message type (see templates below). If the type is not listed, use general and flag the omission for future template addition.
Open with the subject line and a one-sentence summary — the recipient must know in 5 seconds what this is about and whether immediate action is required.
State the facts in a tight block — dates, PO/part/lot, quantity, symptom, governing clause. No adjectives. No speculation. No emotion.
State the ask with a specific date and named acceptance criteria — "please provide containment confirmation by EOD Thursday with a signed certificate" beats "please respond as soon as possible."
Reference the governing document — PO T&Cs clause X, quality agreement section Y, drawing revision Z, APQP element #N, AIAG PPAP §, customer CSR clause, regulation §.
Match the tone to the posture — partner / firm / formal-notice. Formal-notice language is reserved for second-notice or commercial-consequence messages and requires config.yml → supply.authorized_to_send_formal_notice = true or named-executive sign-off; otherwise draft and flag "Needs procurement-leader review before sending."
Close with next step and owner — who from your side will follow up and on what date.
Attach a paper-trail footer — message type, SCAR/NCR# / customer 8D # / CAPA #, issue date, expected response date, escalation state, supplier-portal cross-reference if applicable.

Templates (pick by message type)

`po-confirmation`

Subject: PO [####] — Acknowledgment requested by [date]
Hi [Contact],

We issued PO [####] on [date] for [qty] of [part# / description] at $[unit price],
requested delivery [date] to [dock / plant address from config.yml]. Per quality
agreement section [#] and our supplier-portal SLA, please acknowledge within
[2 business days] and confirm:

  - Acceptance of quantity, price, currency, and delivery date
  - Drawing / spec revision:    [rev]
  - PPAP status:                [Level 1–5 / on file / required for this revision]
  - Country of origin:          [for USMCA / Section 301 / Section 232 cascade]
  - Open deviations:            [list or "none"]
  - Lead-time accuracy:         [confirm against MRP signal]

If any element cannot be met, reply with the proposed alternative and supporting
detail. Acknowledgment posted in [Ariba / Coupa / Jaggaer / Oracle Procurement /
SAP SLC] is preferred.

Reply by: [date]
Primary buyer on our side: [Buyer] ([email])
Supplier-portal reference: [doc # if applicable]

[Signature block from config]

— — —
Message type: po-confirmation
PO reference: [####]
Expected response: [date]

`po-expedite`

Subject: URGENT — PO [####] expedite request — line-stop risk [date]
Hi [Contact],

PO [####] / part [###] is tracking late against need-by date [date]. Current
impact at our plant:

  - Line affected:            [line / cell from config.yml → line_cell_inventory]
  - Customer expedite at risk: [yes / no — customer name]
  - Line-down risk:           [date, quantity at risk, $ exposure]
  - Premium-freight authority: [we will cover per T&Cs clause [#] only if delay
                                originates on our side]
  - Alternative sources checked: [yes / no — result]

Requesting by return message today:

  1. Latest confirmed ship date with carrier tracking
  2. Partial-shipment feasibility (even a short truck today avoids a full line stop)
  3. Premium-freight quote and authorization if applicable
  4. Root cause of the delay and corrective plan if a pattern is forming

Please copy [procurement manager from config] on the reply.

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: po-expedite
PO reference: [####]
Escalation state: [first notice / second notice]
Expected response: [today, EOD]

`scar-8d-request`

Subject: SCAR [####] — Opening for [part #] / lot [###]
Hi [Contact],

We are opening SCAR [####] against lot [###] of part [#] received on [date].
NCR [###] is attached.

Issue summary (facts only):
  - Symptom:                   [what was observed]
  - Quantity affected:         [qty of total received]
  - Detection point:           [incoming / in-process / final / customer]
  - Severity classification:   [major / minor / critical per config.yml → severity_matrix]
  - KPC ◆ / KCC ▲ designation: [from control plan / drawing — if applicable]
  - Customer CSR exposure:     [Ford QOS / GM 1927-44 / Stellantis Q-CSR / Toyota CSL2 /
                                Honda QAS / Nissan QAV / Boeing D6-83107 / Airbus AQP —
                                or "internal only" with rationale]

Per quality agreement section [#] and our QMS framework (ISO 9001:2015 §10.2 /
IATF 16949 §10.2.3 / AS9100D §10.2 — select applicable), please provide an 8D
response with the following milestones:

  - D1 (team) + D2 (problem description):     within 24 hours
  - D3 (interim containment at your facility and at ours): within 48 hours — include
    certified-sorted evidence for any stock on hand and stock-in-transit; submit
    containment certificate signed by your quality manager
  - D4 + D5 (root cause and chosen corrective action): within 10 calendar days
  - D6 (implementation): within 30 days, with implementation evidence (updated control
    plan, PFMEA, work instruction, training records)
  - D7 (prevent recurrence — systemic fix and read-across to similar parts):
    within 30 days
  - D8 (team recognition / close): at effectiveness verification (3 consecutive
    delivered lots without recurrence, or per quality-agreement default)

Attach with your D5: updated control plan, updated PFMEA with RPN-before/after,
PPAP-impact assessment (per AIAG PPAP 4th ed. §2.2 — customer notification triggers),
and any spec / drawing / PPAP impact requiring our re-approval.

We will hold the affected inventory at our plant pending D3 containment acceptance.
Disposition (return, sort-at-supplier-cost, rework, scrap) will be confirmed once
D3 is accepted. Premium freight on replacement parts is at supplier cost per T&Cs
clause [#].

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: scar-8d-request
SCAR reference: [####]
NCR reference: [####]
Customer 8D reference (if cascade): [####]
Expected response (D3): [date]
Expected response (D5): [date]

`scar-response-review`

Subject: SCAR [####] — Response review: [accepted / partial / requires revision]
Hi [Contact],

We reviewed your 8D response dated [date]. Overall status:
[accepted / partial / requires revision].

Specific findings:

  - D2 problem description:           [clear / needs dimensional data / needs photos /
                                       needs IS / IS-NOT format]
  - D3 containment:                   [evidence sufficient / needs sort-certificate /
                                       needs in-transit accounting / needs customer-plant
                                       stock confirmation]
  - D4 root cause:                    [convincing / appears symptomatic — 5-Why stops at
                                       "operator error" or "supplier error"; please extend
                                       to a system cause per IATF 16949 §10.2.3 / AIAG CQI-20]
  - D5 corrective action:             [appropriate / mismatched to root cause]
  - D6 implementation:                [evidence sufficient / needs updated control plan,
                                       PFMEA, work instruction, training records]
  - D7 systemic prevention / read-across: [control plan updated? PFMEA RPN reduction
                                       documented? read-across to similar parts / families /
                                       processes / shifts done? error-proofing per
                                       IATF 16949 §10.2.4 implemented?]
  - PPAP impact:                      [submission required at Level [#] / waiver accepted /
                                       not applicable per AIAG PPAP §2.2]
  - Effectiveness verification plan:  [acceptable — closure on 3 lots without recurrence /
                                       needs defined sample size, threshold, and window /
                                       needs measurement-system validation per AIAG MSA
                                       4th ed. §7]

Next step: [revise D[#] by date / close pending effectiveness verification at 3 lots
delivered without recurrence / close]

Customer notification (if cascade): [completed / pending — date]

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: scar-response-review
SCAR reference: [####]
Disposition: [accepted / partial / requires revision]
Expected response (if revision required): [date]

`delivery-escalation`

Subject: Delivery escalation — PO [####] — Second notice
Hi [Contact],
CC: [procurement manager], [supplier's sales manager], [supplier's executive sponsor if
known and posture = formal-notice]

This is the second written notice on PO [####]. The prior note was sent on [date]
and promised [promised date]. As of today, [status].

Impact to our operation:

  - Line / cell affected:                   [name from config.yml → line_cell_inventory]
  - Customer impact:                        [customer name, schedule impact, expedite
                                             commitment at risk]
  - Production schedule impact:             [units / hours / $ exposure]
  - Premium-freight spend incurred:         [amount if any — at supplier cost per T&Cs
                                             clause [#] if delay originates on supplier side]
  - Customer cascade risk:                  [Ford CSL-1 / GM PRR / Stellantis NCT / Toyota
                                             CL2 / Honda QAS — phase, daily-cert burden,
                                             exit criteria — or "no customer cascade yet"]

Requesting by [date]:

  1. Written ship-date commitment with carrier tracking
  2. Root cause of the delay (8D-format if recurring)
  3. Containment plan for remaining open releases on this part
  4. Premium-freight authorization at supplier cost if delay originates on your side

If this commitment is not received and honored, we will proceed with [next step per
config.yml → supply.escalation_actions: probation status update / alternate-source
qualification / scorecard downgrade / new-business-hold / charge-back per T&Cs
clause [#]]. This note is the predicate for that action under quality agreement
section [#].

[Signature — procurement leader or higher for second-notice]

— — —
Message type: delivery-escalation
PO reference: [####]
Escalation state: second notice
Expected response: [date]
Authorized signer: [name, title]

`quality-hold-notice`

Subject: Quality hold — [part #] / lot [###] received [date]
Hi [Contact],

Lot [###] of part [#] received on [date] has been placed on quality hold at our
plant pending supplier response. NCR [###] is attached.

  - Quantity on hold:           [qty]
  - Observed defect:            [description with photo and measurement reference]
  - Specification:              [drawing # / rev / characteristic ID]
  - Actual:                     [measurement / observation]
  - KPC ◆ / KCC ▲ designation:  [from control plan / drawing]
  - Customer CSR exposure:      [or "internal only"]

Dispositions considered: sort at supplier cost, sort at our plant with supplier
charge-back, rework, return, scrap. No disposition will proceed without supplier
confirmation per quality agreement section [#].

Please provide within [48 hours]:

  1. Containment confirmation at your facility (same PN, adjacent lots, in-transit)
  2. Proposed disposition for our on-hand inventory and any customer-plant inventory
  3. Replacement-parts plan with delivery date and premium-freight authorization
  4. SCAR [####] will be opened in parallel per standard flow (see scar-8d-request)

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: quality-hold-notice
NCR reference: [####]
Quality-hold quantity: [qty]
Expected response: [48 hours]

`controlled-shipping-cascade`

Subject: Controlled-shipping cascade — [customer name] [phase] — your part [###]
Hi [Contact],

[Customer name] has placed our [plant / part / program] under [Ford CSL-1 /
Ford CSL-2 / GM CS-I / GM CS-II / Stellantis NCT / Toyota CL2 / Toyota CL3 /
Honda QAS-escalated / Airbus AQP-escalated / Boeing controlled-shipping]
effective [date], driven by [failure mode / NCR / 8D #]. The root cause has been
traced to part [###] supplied by your facility.

Customer-imposed requirements that now cascade to you:

  - Daily certified-sort certificate:       [yes / no — sort instruction attached]
  - 100% containment on stock-in-transit:   [yes — qty and tracking numbers]
  - Containment on stock at our plant:      [yes — qty and our hold tag #s]
  - PPAP re-submission:                     [Level [#] / waiver / not required —
                                             per customer determination and
                                             AIAG PPAP §2.2]
  - Daily reporting cadence:                [daily / shift / weekly — to whom]
  - Exit criteria:                          [from customer — e.g., 20 lots delivered
                                             without recurrence at customer plant; or
                                             customer-defined Cpk threshold]
  - Customer plant contact:                 [name, role]

Required from you by [date]:

  1. Acknowledgment of cascade and commitment to the daily-cert workflow
  2. Containment certificate signed by your quality manager
  3. SCAR [####] opening (see scar-8d-request — D3 within 48 hours; D5 within
     10 calendar days)
  4. Premium-freight authorization at supplier cost per T&Cs clause [#]
  5. Identified resource(s) — quality engineer, supplier-quality liaison — for the
     duration of controlled shipping

Note: While the cascade is active, we will require certified-sort evidence on
every shipment from your facility. Daily-cert burden is at supplier cost. Exit
from the cascade requires customer concurrence.

[Signature — supplier-quality lead, copy procurement leader and quality director]

— — —
Message type: controlled-shipping-cascade
Customer cascade reference: [customer + phase + 8D #]
SCAR reference: [####]
Cascade entry date: [date]
Daily-cert workflow start: [date]

`tariff-pass-through-request`

Subject: Tariff cost evidence — part [###] — [Section 232 metals / Section 232 pharma /
Section 232 semiconductor / Section 301 — applicable proclamation / EO]
Hi [Contact],

Effective [date], [Section 232 (Proclamations 9705 / 9980 + 2025–2026 amendments) /
Section 232 pharmaceutical (2026 EO + Commerce 2026-05-11 procedures, 100% effective
2026-07-31 large / 2026-09-29 small) / Section 232 semiconductor Phase 2 (Proclamation
11002, market update 2026-07-01) / Section 301 China-origin list [#]] imposes a [%]
duty on HTSUS classification [####.##.####] for the product / commodity supplied
under PO [####], part [###].

We are working through our customer-side authorization on tariff pass-through and
need verifiable supplier-side cost evidence to support the request. Per quality
agreement section [#] and our supplier-cost-transparency clause [#], please
provide within [10 business days]:

  1. Confirmation of HTSUS classification with documentation (binding ruling,
     classification database extract, or your customs broker's determination)
  2. Country of origin per CBP marking rules; substantial-transformation rationale
     if multi-country
  3. USMCA / FTA eligibility analysis — if eligible, certificate of origin
  4. Material cost share of FOB price (steel, aluminum, semiconductor, API content)
     and the share attributable to the tariff-affected commodity
  5. Section 232 Annex I / IV technical-correction status if metals (per CBP
     2026-05-06 note)
  6. Onshoring-agreement application status (Section 232 pharmaceutical only —
     application window 2026-05-11 → 2026-06-12; please confirm whether you intend
     to apply, are co-applying through us or a downstream customer, or have a
     decision pending)
  7. Proposed pass-through methodology (full pass-through / cost-share / surcharge
     line item)
  8. Effective date of the proposed adjustment and any supplier-cost-recovery
     window claim

Pass-through approval is conditional on our customer-side authorization (we will
confirm by [date]). Until then, please continue at the existing PO price.

Premium-freight, expedite, and dual-sourcing claims related to tariff-driven
shifts are evaluated separately and require an itemized request.

[Signature — procurement lead with supplier-quality copy]

— — —
Message type: tariff-pass-through-request
Tariff authority: [Section 232 / Section 301 / proclamation #]
HTSUS classification: [####.##.####]
Effective date: [date]
Expected response: [10 business days]

`ppap-submission-request`

Subject: PPAP submission required — part [###] / [reason]
Hi [Contact],

Per AIAG PPAP 4th ed. §2.2 (customer notification triggers) and quality agreement
section [#], a PPAP submission is required for part [###] driven by [trigger
selected from §2.2.1: engineering change / lapse > 12 months / change in source /
change in part processing / inspection / location / sub-supplier — or customer-
specific equivalent].

Required submission:

  - Level:                       [1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 — per our customer's PPAP
                                  level requirement or quality-agreement default]
  - Required elements:           [per AIAG PPAP §1.2 elements list — typically:
                                  design records / engineering change documents /
                                  customer engineering approval / DFMEA / process
                                  flow diagram / PFMEA / control plan / MSA studies /
                                  dimensional results / material and performance
                                  test results / initial process studies (Cpk on
                                  KPC/KCC characteristics) / qualified laboratory
                                  documentation / appearance approval report (if
                                  applicable) / sample production parts / master
                                  sample / checking aids / records of compliance
                                  with customer-specific requirements / part
                                  submission warrant (PSW) / bulk material
                                  requirements checklist (if applicable)]
  - Initial process studies:     [Cpk ≥ 1.67 for KPCs per AIAG default unless
                                  customer-specific overrides]
  - Submission portal:           [our supplier-portal upload location / IMDS for
                                  automotive material data]
  - PSW signature authority:     [supplier quality manager or higher]
  - Target submission date:      [date]
  - Production approval date:    [date]

Aerospace addendum (if AS9100D / AS9145): provide First Article Inspection (FAI)
per AS9102 with Form 1 / 2 / 3 completed.

Medical-device addendum (if ISO 13485 / 21 CFR 820 — FDA QMSR effective 2026-02-02):
provide design-history-file linkage, validation evidence, and any required UDI
elements.

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: ppap-submission-request
Trigger: [§2.2.1 element]
PPAP level required: [#]
Target submission date: [date]

`rfq-followup`

Subject: RFQ [####] — Status and clarification
Hi [Contact],

Following up on RFQ [####] issued [date] for [part / assembly / commodity]. Quote
due date was [date].

Open items on our side:
  - [Any new drawing revision, volume change, lifetime info, packaging change,
     Incoterms update]

Open items likely on your side:
  - Spec questions:                          [list or "none known"]
  - Tooling / NRE scope clarification:       [list]
  - Packaging / logistics / Incoterms 2020:  [EXW / FCA / FOB / DAP / DDP]
  - Compliance attestations needed:          [IMDS / CMRT / REACH / RoHS / UFLPA /
                                              EUDR / CRMA — per part / per commodity]
  - Tariff classification (HTSUS) and origin
  - Capacity confirmation against our forecast volume

Could you confirm:

  (a) Expected quote date
  (b) Any pre-quote questions or technical gaps
  (c) Target piece-price benchmark we shared on [date]
  (d) Lead-time at our forecast volume
  (e) Tooling lead-time and total NRE
  (f) Tariff exposure and pass-through expectation at quote

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: rfq-followup
RFQ reference: [####]
Expected response: [date]

`scorecard-feedback`

Subject: Quarterly scorecard — [supplier] — [quarter]
Hi [Contact],

Attached is your [quarter] scorecard.

Summary:

  - Overall grade:                [A / B / C / D per config.yml → scorecard_scale]
  - Tier status:                  [critical / preferred / approved / probation /
                                   new-business-hold] (movement vs. last quarter: [Δ])
  - On-time delivery:             [%]      (target: [%])
  - Quality PPM (defective):      [###]    (target: [###])
  - SCAR responsiveness:          [%]      within target D3 / D5 windows
  - PPAP / engineering responsiveness: [%]
  - Recovery from incidents:      [score / narrative]
  - Premium-freight burden:       [$ at supplier cost in quarter]
  - Customer cascade impact:      [Ford CSL / GM CS / Stellantis NCT / Toyota CL events
                                   driven by this supplier in the quarter, if any]
  - Compliance attestations:      [CMRT / REACH / RoHS / UFLPA / EUDR / IMDS — status]

What's working:           [1–2 specific items with data]
Watch items:              [1–2 specific items with data]
Action for next quarter:  [1 concrete ask — e.g., "reduce PPM on part family X
                          below 500" or "complete CQI-9 self-assessment by [date]"]

Happy to walk the scorecard on a call — my calendar is [link / ask for time].

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: scorecard-feedback
Quarter: [Q#-YYYY]
Tier status: [tier]
Tier change vs. prior quarter: [up / down / unchanged]

`price-dispute`

Subject: PPV review — PO [####] / part [#]
Hi [Contact],

Invoice [###] against PO [####] reflects $[amount] vs. PO price of $[amount]
(variance: $[amount], [%]). Per quality agreement section [#] / T&Cs clause [#],
invoices must match PO unless an authorized deviation, executed price-change
agreement, or tariff pass-through authorization is on file.

  - PO price effective date:         [date]
  - Invoice date:                    [date]
  - Last agreed price change:        [date, source doc, authorized signer]
  - Tariff pass-through authorization on file: [yes / no — see tariff-pass-through-request]
  - Surcharge line item on invoice:  [yes / no — detail]

Please confirm which applies:

  1. Invoice is incorrect — credit memo to follow
  2. There is an authorized price change we have not recorded — provide the signed
     agreement, effective date, and signers
  3. Tariff pass-through under [Section 232 / Section 301] is being claimed — provide
     the supporting cost evidence per the tariff-pass-through-request workflow
  4. Other — please specify

We will hold payment on the variance portion pending resolution; the PO-priced
portion will release on standard terms.

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: price-dispute
PO reference: [####]
Variance: $[amount] / [%]
Expected response: [date]

`deviation-request-review`

Subject: Deviation request review — [supplier ref # or our own]
Hi [Contact],

We received your deviation request dated [date] for part [#], characteristic
[####]. Our review:

  - Technical impact:                     [reviewed by engineering — accept / reject /
                                           need more info]
  - KPC ◆ / KCC ▲ designation affected?   [yes / no — if yes, escalate to customer
                                           approval per CSR]
  - Customer / regulatory approval needed?[internal only / customer notification
                                           required / regulatory notification required
                                           — FDA / EU MDR / NHTSA]
  - PPAP impact:                          [waiver / submission / not applicable per
                                           AIAG PPAP §2.2]
  - Disposition:                          [approved for lot size X only / approved
                                           through date / rejected]
  - Conditions:                           [100% sort / additional marking / PPAP update /
                                           revised control plan / certified inspector
                                           required]

If approved, deviation #[###] applies to lot [###] (or PO [####]) only. Standard
specification resumes on the next release. Re-occurrence triggers SCAR opening.

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: deviation-request-review
Deviation reference: [####]
Disposition: [approved / rejected / conditional]
Expiration: [date / lot # / quantity]

`eol-ltb-notice-acknowledgment`

Subject: EOL / Last-Time-Buy notice — part [###] — acknowledgment and impact
Hi [Contact],

We received your end-of-life / discontinuance / last-time-buy notice dated [date]
for part [###]. Per our supply agreement section [#] and standard notice clause,
we acknowledge receipt and are working through impact.

Initial impact assessment:

  - Active programs consuming this part:   [list of programs / customers]
  - Customer notification cascade required:[yes / no — and which customers per CSR]
  - Lifetime demand estimate:              [units] across [months]
  - Last-time-buy quantity (preliminary):  [units]
  - Last-time-buy commit-by date you proposed:  [date]
  - Validation impact (medical / pharma / aerospace): [GAMP 5 / 21 CFR 820 /
                                            AS9100 — requalification required?]
  - Alternate-source / second-source qualification status: [in progress / not started]
  - Tooling / IP / drawings retention obligations: [per supply agreement clause [#]]

Requesting within [10 business days]:

  1. Confirmed last-time-buy quantity and pricing — held firm through [date]
  2. Confirmed last-ship date
  3. Tooling disposition (return / scrap with certification / hold at supplier)
  4. Replacement-part / alternate-source recommendation if available
  5. Bridging-supply commitment if alternate-source qualification slips

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: eol-ltb-notice-acknowledgment
Part reference: [###]
Notice date: [date]
LTB commit deadline: [date]

`supplier-audit-notice`

Subject: Supplier audit notice — [audit type] at your [facility] on [date]
Hi [Contact],

Per quality agreement section [#] / IATF 16949 §8.4.2.3 / ISO 9001 §8.4 / AS9100D
§8.4 supplier-control requirements, we will conduct a [process audit per VDA 6.3 /
QMS audit / AIAG CQI-9 heat treat / CQI-11 plating / CQI-12 coating / CQI-15 welding /
CQI-17 soldering / CQI-23 molding / CQI-27 casting / supplier self-assessment review]
at your [facility location] on [date].

Scope:
  - Part families:                      [list]
  - Processes audited:                  [list — process steps from your control plan]
  - QMS clauses:                        [ISO 9001 / IATF 16949 / AS9100D — clauses]
  - Special-process self-assessment:    [CQI-# in scope or not]
  - Open SCARs / CAPAs reviewed:        [list]

Audit team:                       [auditor names, titles, certifications]
Duration:                         [days]
Required from your side:
  - Quality manager and process owner on site for the duration
  - Latest control plans, PFMEAs, PPAPs, MSA studies, SPC charts on KPC/KCC
    characteristics, training records, calibration records, internal audit records
  - Open NCR / CAPA list and evidence
  - Special-process self-assessment record (if applicable)
  - Conflict-minerals / UFLPA / REACH / RoHS / CMRT current attestations

Findings will be communicated in a closing meeting and documented in a written
audit report within [10 business days]. Corrective actions on majors are due
within [30 calendar days]; minors within [60 days].

[Signature]

— — —
Message type: supplier-audit-notice
Audit type: [type]
Audit date: [date]
Audit duration: [days]

`compliance-attestation-request`

Subject: Compliance attestation — [framework] — annual / triggered request
Hi [Contact],

Per quality agreement section [#] and applicable regulation, please provide
current attestation for the following:

  - Conflict Minerals (Dodd-Frank §1502): CMRT in latest RMI template, signed
  - UFLPA due-diligence statement:        confirming no UFLPA Entity List exposure
                                          (current Entity List: 144 entries per
                                          CBP enforcement state)
  - EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR):   due-diligence statement for in-scope
                                          commodities
  - REACH SVHC:                           current SVHC list compliance + safe-use
                                          information
  - RoHS:                                 declaration of conformity per Directive
                                          2011/65/EU and amendments
  - Modern Slavery Act (UK / AUS / CA):   current-year statement
  - California Prop 65:                   for products shipped to California
  - EU CRMA:                              critical-raw-materials substance declarations
                                          for in-scope products
  - IMDS (automotive material data):      current submission, accepted status
  - Country-of-origin / USMCA certificate of origin (annual):  for all parts in scope

Due:                          [date]
Submission method:            [our supplier-portal / email to compliance@]
Authorized signer required:   [quality director or higher]
Refresh cadence:              [annual / change-triggered / regulatory-update-triggered]

[Signature — compliance / supplier-quality lead]

— — —
Message type: compliance-attestation-request
Framework(s): [list]
Due: [date]

`general`

(Use only when no template fits. Flag in the output that a custom template may be worth adding to this skill in the next evaluator cycle.)

Supplier-portal integration

From config.yml → procurement.portal_platform, structure the output and the cross-reference for native posting where the portal is the authoritative record:

SAP Ariba / Ariba Network — Message routed through Ariba Discovery or supplier-collaboration document; SCAR opened as supplier-quality issue; PO acknowledgment via Ariba PO acknowledgment workflow; supplier-portal cross-reference document number captured in paper-trail footer.
Coupa / Coupa Sourcing Optimization — Message routed through Coupa supplier-record; supplier-onboarding-and-information-management module used for compliance attestations.
Jaggaer / Jaggaer Direct / Jaggaer Indirect — Sourcing-event reference for RFQ follow-ups; supplier-performance module for scorecards.
Oracle Procurement Cloud / Oracle Supplier Portal — Message routed through supplier negotiation or supplier-qualification record; quality-issue routed through Oracle Quality Cloud.
SAP SLC / SAP S/4HANA Sourcing — Supplier lifecycle and contract management; quality info record (QIR) updated on supplier-quality events.
GEP SMART / GEP NEXXE — Supplier-collaboration document; quality-event tracking.
Ivalua — Supplier-performance management module; quality-incident workflow.
ServiceNow Supplier Lifecycle Operations — Supplier-record-and-information-management; integration with ServiceNow Manufacturing Commercial Operations for cascade to internal Quality Issues Management.
Customer supplier portals (Covisint legacy / Ford SIM / GM SupplyPower / Stellantis eSupplierConnect / Toyota TQMS / Honda HSCN / Boeing Exostar / Airbus AirSupply) — When the cascade is customer-driven, the customer portal is the authoritative record; the supplier-side message must cross-reference the customer portal document number and customer 8D ID.
Platform-neutral output — Standard markdown with YAML frontmatter keyed on: message_type / supplier_code / supplier_tier / po_ref / scar_ref / ncr_ref / customer_cascade_ref / escalation_state / authorized_signer / expected_response_date / paper_trail_id.

Output Requirements

Every message opens with a dated subject line that encodes message type and severity
One-sentence summary appears before any detail so the reader can triage in 5 seconds
Facts block separates what is observed from what is inferred — no speculation as fact
Ask is specific with a date and acceptance criteria
Governing clauses are cited when they apply and are not fabricated — mark [cite governing clause] when unknown
KPC ◆ / KCC ▲ designation appears where applicable, with control-plan / drawing reference
Customer cascade context appears in the subject line and in a named cascade-context block when controlled shipping has cascaded
Tariff context appears with HTSUS classification, proclamation / EO reference, effective date, and rate when a tariff message
Escalation state (first / second / formal-notice) is visible in the subject and CC list
Paper-trail footer records message type, reference numbers, expected response date, escalation state, and supplier-portal cross-reference if applicable
Signature block from config.yml — never fabricate a title or phone number
Authorized signer matches the message-type authority matrix in config.yml
Output is ready to paste into email or supplier-portal with zero editing; flag any [TO BE COMPLETED] placeholders that the user must fill before sending
Saved to outputs/ with filename [message-type]_[supplier-code]_[YYYY-MM-DD].md if the user confirms

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Do not soften a SCAR, second-notice delivery escalation, controlled-shipping cascade, or tariff pass-through request into partner-tone — audit trails and commercial defenses depend on clear escalation language at the right step.
Do not fabricate quality-agreement, T&C, AIAG PPAP, ISO, IATF, AS9100, FDA, or proclamation clause numbers. If the clause is not supplied, write "[cite governing clause]" and let the user fill it in.
Do not threaten commercial consequences (probation, delisting, charge-back, new-business-hold, de-sourcing) unless authorized per config.yml → supply.authorized_to_send_formal_notice or with explicit named-executive sign-off. Draft and flag for review instead.
Do not assign root cause to the supplier in the opening message — that's the supplier's job in the 8D D4. State symptoms only; reserve interpretive language for the scar-response-review.
Do not use adjectives like "unacceptable," "disappointed," "frustrating," "unprofessional," or "concerning" — they degrade the record without helping the outcome.
Do not bury the ask or the date. The reviewer must see both in the first screen.
Do not skip the CC of procurement leadership on second-notice escalations or supplier executive sponsor on controlled-shipping cascades.
Do not commit pass-through of a tariff cost without confirming customer-side authorization. Tariff pass-through requires both supplier-side cost evidence and customer-side acceptance; both must be on file before a price change is authorized.
Do not issue a controlled-shipping cascade without naming the customer 8D, the cascade phase, and the customer-defined exit criteria. A cascade without exit criteria is open-ended and indefensible at the next supplier audit.
Do not omit the supplier-portal cross-reference when the portal is the authoritative record. Email plus portal entry is the standard; email alone misses the audit-trail requirement.
Do not rewrite a customer's verbatim 8D wording when cascading. The customer's language is the evidence; your interpretation belongs in a separate paragraph.
Do not issue a compliance-attestation-request to suppliers in the same calendar year for the same framework unless a regulatory update or a change in supplier ownership / facility / sub-tier has occurred. Repetitive attestations without trigger erode supplier engagement.
Do not treat a tariff-pass-through-request as authority for the supplier to immediately invoice at a higher price. The request is for cost evidence; the price change is gated on the price-dispute or executed-PO-amendment workflow.
Do not use the general template when a specific template applies. Routing-to-general is the most common audit gap on supplier communications.

Integration Notes

Pairs with CAPA Document Builder (v3.0) — A SCAR response is the upstream input to a mirror customer-facing CAPA; the supplier's 8D feeds the trigger field, and the receiving-side CAPA covers incoming-inspection-plan, control-plan, and PPAP-impact assessment updates. Consistent issue-number cross-reference is required.
Pairs with Supply Chain Risk Assessment (v2.0) — Repeat SCARs, second-notice escalations, controlled-shipping cascades, tariff-affected suppliers, EOL/LTB notices, and compliance-attestation gaps should trigger a risk review on the affected supplier. The supplier-tier matrix is shared.
Pairs with Quality Report Generator (v3.0) — Supplier scorecard data and customer-cascade activity flow into the weekly / monthly quality report's supplier-performance section.
Pairs with Compliance Audit Prep (v2.0) — Supplier communications are a frequent audit-evidence source for ISO 9001 §8.4 / IATF 16949 §8.4 / AS9100D §8.4 / 21 CFR 820.50 supplier-control clauses; consistent format and paper-trail footer are required.
Pairs with Tariff Impact Analysis (v1.0) — Tariff cost evidence collected via tariff-pass-through-request feeds the Tariff Impact Analysis landed-cost model; the model output supports the customer-side authorization workflow.
Pairs with Sustainability & Emissions Report — Compliance attestations (REACH SVHC, RoHS, EUDR, CMRT, CRMA) feed Scope 3 and product-stewardship reporting.
Pairs with Warranty Claim Analyzer — Supplier-recovery SCAR stubs generated by the warranty skill are handed to the scar-8d-request template for full D1–D8 authoring; cost-recovery cross-reference is required.
Pairs with Production Scheduling Optimizer — Delivery escalations and EOL/LTB notices feed material-availability inputs to scheduling.
Pairs with Shift Handoff Report (v3.0) — Active second-notice escalations, controlled-shipping cascades, and open SCARs surface on the daily shift handoff's materials / logistics row.

Success Metrics

SCAR response-time compliance: % of suppliers hitting the D3 (48 hr) and D5 (10 calendar day) windows; track by supplier tier
Escalation escape rate: how often a first-notice resolves without needing a second-notice
Controlled-shipping exit time: average days from cascade entry to customer-confirmed exit (track by customer and by failure mode)
Tariff pass-through evidence turnaround: average days from request to complete supplier-cost evidence package
Record completeness: % of supplier messages with reference #s, dated ask, governing clause cited, paper-trail footer, supplier-portal cross-reference where applicable
Scorecard actionability: % of scorecard feedback that leads to a tracked supplier improvement plan (closed-loop in supplier-portal or QMS)
Compliance-attestation refresh rate: % of critical-tier suppliers with current-year CMRT / UFLPA / REACH / RoHS / EUDR / CRMA on file
Audit-finding rate on supplier-control clauses: target zero major NCs in ISO / IATF / AS9100 / FDA audits against ISO 9001 §8.4 / IATF 16949 §8.4 / AS9100D §8.4 / 21 CFR 820.50
PPAP submission completeness: % of triggered PPAPs with all elements per AIAG §1.2 and customer level requirement on first submission

Example Output

[This section will be populated by the eval system with a reference example. For now, run the skill with sample input to see output quality.]