investigate-capa-root-cause
关于
This skill guides developers through structured root cause analysis and CAPA management for compliance issues, using methods like 5-Why and fishbone diagrams. It is designed for responding to audit findings, system deviations, data integrity anomalies, or recurring problems. The tool handles the full process from investigation and action design to effectiveness verification and trend analysis.
快速安装
Claude Code
推荐npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanacgit clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/investigate-capa-root-cause在 Claude Code 中复制并粘贴此命令以安装该技能
技能文档
查 CAPA 根因
為合規偏差行結構化根因調查並發展有效之糾正與預防行動。
適用時機
- 審計發現需 CAPA
- 於已驗證系統中發生偏差或事件
- 法規檢查觀察需正式回應
- 數據完整異常需調查
- 屢現問題暗示系統性根因
輸入
- 必要:偏差、發現或事件之描述
- 必要:嚴重度分類(關鍵、主要、次要)
- 必要:審計或調查中所收證據
- 選擇性:先前相關 CAPA 或調查
- 選擇性:相關 SOP、驗證文件與系統日誌
- 選擇性:涉人員之訪談記
步驟
步驟一:啟調查
# Root Cause Investigation
## Document ID: RCA-[CAPA-ID]
## CAPA Reference: CAPA-[YYYY]-[NNN]
### 1. Trigger
| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Source | [Audit finding / Deviation / Inspection observation / Monitoring alert] |
| Reference | [Finding ID, deviation ID, or observation number] |
| System | [Affected system name and version] |
| Date discovered | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
| Severity | [Critical / Major / Minor] |
| Investigator | [Name, Title] |
| Investigation deadline | [Date — per severity: Critical 15 days, Major 30 days, Minor 60 days] |
### 2. Problem Statement
[Objective, factual description of what happened, what should have happened, and the gap between the two. No blame, no assumptions.]
### 3. Immediate Containment (if required)
| Action | Owner | Completed |
|--------|-------|-----------|
| [e.g., Restrict system access pending investigation] | [Name] | [Date] |
| [e.g., Quarantine affected batch records] | [Name] | [Date] |
| [e.g., Implement manual workaround] | [Name] | [Date] |
預期: 調查已啟附明問題陳述,關鍵發現之遏制行動於 24 時內。 失敗時: 若遏制不能立行,升至 QA 主任並記延遲遏制之險。
步驟二:擇調查法
依問題複雜度擇法:
### Investigation Method Selection
| Method | Best For | Complexity | Output |
|--------|----------|-----------|--------|
| **5-Why Analysis** | Single-cause problems, straightforward failures | Low | Linear cause chain |
| **Fishbone (Ishikawa)** | Multi-factor problems, process failures | Medium | Cause-and-effect diagram |
| **Fault Tree Analysis** | System failures, safety-critical events | High | Boolean logic tree |
**Selected method:** [5-Why / Fishbone / Fault Tree / Combination]
**Rationale:** [Why this method is appropriate for this problem]
預期: 所擇法匹配問題複雜度——勿為簡程式誤用故障樹,亦勿為複系統性敗用 5-Why。 失敗時: 若首法未達說服之根因,用第二法。方法間之匯聚強結論。
步驟三:行根因分析
選 A:5-Why 分析
### 5-Why Analysis
| Level | Question | Answer | Evidence |
|-------|----------|--------|----------|
| Why 1 | Why did [the problem] occur? | [Immediate cause] | [Evidence reference] |
| Why 2 | Why did [immediate cause] occur? | [Contributing factor] | [Evidence reference] |
| Why 3 | Why did [contributing factor] occur? | [Deeper cause] | [Evidence reference] |
| Why 4 | Why did [deeper cause] occur? | [Systemic cause] | [Evidence reference] |
| Why 5 | Why did [systemic cause] occur? | [Root cause] | [Evidence reference] |
**Root cause:** [Clear statement of the fundamental cause]
選 B:魚骨(石川)圖
### Fishbone Analysis
Analyse causes across six standard categories:
| Category | Potential Causes | Confirmed? | Evidence |
|----------|-----------------|------------|----------|
| **People** | Inadequate training, unfamiliarity with SOP, staffing shortage | [Y/N] | [Ref] |
| **Process** | SOP unclear, missing step, wrong sequence | [Y/N] | [Ref] |
| **Technology** | System misconfiguration, software bug, interface failure | [Y/N] | [Ref] |
| **Materials** | Incorrect input data, wrong version of reference document | [Y/N] | [Ref] |
| **Measurement** | Wrong metric, inadequate monitoring, missed threshold | [Y/N] | [Ref] |
| **Environment** | Organisational change, regulatory change, resource constraints | [Y/N] | [Ref] |
**Contributing causes:** [List confirmed causes]
**Root cause(s):** [The fundamental cause(s) — may be more than one]
選 C:故障樹分析
### Fault Tree Analysis
**Top event:** [The undesired event]
Level 1 (OR gate — any of these could cause the top event):
├── [Cause A]
│ Level 2 (AND gate — both needed):
│ ├── [Sub-cause A1]
│ └── [Sub-cause A2]
├── [Cause B]
│ Level 2 (OR gate):
│ ├── [Sub-cause B1]
│ └── [Sub-cause B2]
└── [Cause C]
**Minimal cut sets:** [Smallest combinations of events that cause the top event]
**Root cause(s):** [Fundamental failures identified in the tree]
預期: 根因分析達根本因(非僅症狀)附每步之支持證據。 失敗時: 若分析僅產症狀(「用戶誤」),深挖。問:「用戶何以能犯此誤?何控當阻之?」
步驟四:設計糾正與預防行動
明別於修正、糾正行動與預防行動:
### CAPA Plan
| Category | Definition | Action | Owner | Deadline |
|----------|-----------|--------|-------|----------|
| **Correction** | Fix the immediate problem | [e.g., Re-enable audit trail for batch module] | [Name] | [Date] |
| **Corrective Action** | Eliminate the root cause | [e.g., Remove admin ability to disable audit trail; require change control for all audit trail configuration changes] | [Name] | [Date] |
| **Preventive Action** | Prevent recurrence in other areas | [e.g., Audit all systems for audit trail disable capability; add monitoring alert for audit trail configuration changes] | [Name] | [Date] |
### CAPA Details
**CAPA-[YYYY]-[NNN]-CA1: [Corrective Action Title]**
- **Root cause addressed:** [Specific root cause from Step 3]
- **Action description:** [Detailed description of what will be done]
- **Success criteria:** [Measurable outcome that proves the action worked]
- **Verification method:** [How effectiveness will be checked]
- **Verification date:** [When effectiveness will be verified — typically 3-6 months after implementation]
**CAPA-[YYYY]-[NNN]-PA1: [Preventive Action Title]**
- **Risk addressed:** [What recurrence or spread this prevents]
- **Action description:** [Detailed description]
- **Success criteria:** [Measurable outcome]
- **Verification method:** [How effectiveness will be checked]
- **Verification date:** [Date]
預期: 每 CAPA 行動追至特定根因,具可測成功標準,並含有效性驗證計劃。 失敗時: 若成功標準糊(「改善合規」),改之為具體可測(「六連續月內無審計軌跡配置變於變更控制之外」)。
步驟五:驗有效性
CAPA 實施後,驗行動實有效:
### Effectiveness Verification
**CAPA-[YYYY]-[NNN] — Verification Record**
| CAPA Action | Verification Date | Method | Evidence | Result |
|-------------|------------------|--------|----------|--------|
| CA1: [Action] | [Date] | [Method: audit, sampling, metric review] | [Evidence reference] | [Effective / Not Effective] |
| PA1: [Action] | [Date] | [Method] | [Evidence reference] | [Effective / Not Effective] |
### Effectiveness Criteria Check
- [ ] The original problem has not recurred since CAPA implementation
- [ ] The corrective action eliminated the root cause (evidence: [reference])
- [ ] The preventive action has been applied to similar systems/processes
- [ ] No new issues were introduced by the CAPA actions
### CAPA Closure
| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Closure decision | [Closed — Effective / Closed — Not Effective / Extended] |
| Closed by | [Name, Title] |
| Closure date | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
| Next review | [If recurring, when to re-check] |
預期: 有效性驗證證根因實已除,非僅行動已成。 失敗時: 若驗證示 CAPA 無效,重啟調查並發展修訂之行動。勿閉無效 CAPA。
步驟六:析 CAPA 趨勢
### CAPA Trend Analysis
| Period | Total CAPAs | By Source | Top 3 Root Cause Categories | Recurring? |
|--------|------------|-----------|---------------------------|------------|
| Q1 20XX | [N] | Audit: [n], Deviation: [n], Monitoring: [n] | [Cat1], [Cat2], [Cat3] | [Y/N] |
| Q2 20XX | [N] | Audit: [n], Deviation: [n], Monitoring: [n] | [Cat1], [Cat2], [Cat3] | [Y/N] |
### Systemic Issues
| Issue | Frequency | Systems Affected | Recommended Action |
|-------|-----------|-----------------|-------------------|
| [e.g., Training gaps] | [N occurrences in 12 months] | [Systems] | [Systemic programme improvement] |
預期: 趨勢分析識個 CAPA 所失之系統性問題。 失敗時: 若趨勢露 CAPA 後屢現根因,CAPA 治症。升至管理審以系統性介入。
驗證
- 調查於需時線內啟(關鍵 24 時、主要 72 時)
- 問題陳述為事實而不歸咎
- 調查法適問題複雜度
- 根因分析達根本因(非僅症狀)
- 每根因步以證據支
- CAPA 別修正、糾正行動與預防行動
- 每 CAPA 具可測成功標準與驗證計劃
- 有效性於 CAPA 閉前以證據驗
- 趨勢分析至少季審
常見陷阱
- 止於症狀:「用戶誤」非根因。根因乃系統或程式何以容誤
- CAPA = 再訓:再訓僅應對一可能根因(知)。若真根因為系統設計缺或 SOP 不清,再訓不阻再發
- 未驗即閉:成行動與驗其有效異。未驗有效之 CAPA 乃待發之法規引用
- 歸咎導向之調查:聚於何人誤而非何容誤之調查損品質文化並阻報告
- 無趨勢:個 CAPA 似不關,然趨勢常露系統問題(如跨多系統之「訓練」根因或示訓練計劃壞)
相關技能
conduct-gxp-audit— 審計生需 CAPA 之發現monitor-data-integrity— 監察異常觸發調查manage-change-control— CAPA 驅之變過變更控制prepare-inspection-readiness— 開與逾期之 CAPA 為檢查首要目標design-training-program— 當根因與訓練相關,改訓練計劃
GitHub 仓库
相关推荐技能
executing-plans
设计该Skill用于当开发者提供完整实施计划时,以受控批次方式执行代码实现。它会先审阅计划并提出疑问,然后分批次执行任务(默认每批3个任务),并在批次间暂停等待审查。关键特性包括分批次执行、内置检查点和架构师审查机制,确保复杂系统实现的可控性。
requesting-code-review
设计该Skill可在完成任务、实现主要功能或合并代码前自动调度代码审查子代理,确保实现符合需求和计划。它支持通过指定git SHA范围进行精准的代码变更审查,帮助开发者在关键节点及时发现潜在问题。核心原则是"早审查、勤审查",适用于开发流程的各个关键阶段。
connect-mcp-server
设计这个Skill指导开发者如何将MCP服务器连接到Claude Code,支持HTTP、stdio和SSE三种传输协议。它涵盖了从安装配置到认证安全的完整流程,适用于集成GitHub、Notion、数据库等外部服务。当开发者需要添加集成、配置外部工具或提及MCP相关功能时,这个Skill能提供实用的操作指南。
web-cli-teleport
设计该Skill帮助开发者根据任务特性选择Claude Code的Web或CLI界面,并指导如何在两种环境间无缝迁移会话。它能分析任务复杂度、迭代需求等要素,推荐最优工作界面和工作流。关键特性包括会话状态管理、环境切换指导和上下文优化建议。
