Produces a consultant-grade, risk-proportionate CDM 2015 Construction Phase Plan (CPP) for a named construction project. Use this skill whenever a user asks to build, write, or review a Construction Phase Plan, a CPP, a CDM 2015 Regulation 12 plan, or the principal contractor's pre-start plan. Forces project specificity (refuses 'a building site' — needs the named project, at least one significant activity, and the contractor configuration), sets out management & arrangements, site rules, and significant risks & controls by activity ranked by the hierarchy of controls (work at height leads with collective protection, never PPE), states the F10 / Reg 12 notification duty for a notifiable project, and cross-references the wider CDM document chain (Pre-Construction Information and the Health & Safety File). Grounded in CDM 2015 Reg 12 + HSE L153 in the UK, or 29 CFR 1926 Subpart C in the USA; India BOCW defers to hse-india with state detection. Decision-support only; a competent person must review the output.
Produces a consultant-grade, risk-proportionate CDM 2015 Construction Phase Plan (CPP) for a named construction project. Use this skill whenever a user asks to build, write, or review a Construction Phase Plan, a CPP, a CDM 2015 Regulation 12 plan, or the principal contractor's pre-start plan. Forces project specificity (refuses 'a building site' — needs the named project, at least one significant activity, and the contractor configuration), sets out management & arrangements, site rules, and significant risks & controls by activity ranked by the hierarchy of controls (work at height leads with collective protection, never PPE), states the F10 / Reg 12 notification duty for a notifiable project, and cross-references the wider CDM document chain (Pre-Construction Information and the Health & Safety File). Grounded in CDM 2015 Reg 12 + HSE L153 in the UK, or 29 CFR 1926 Subpart C in the USA; India BOCW defers to hse-india with state detection. Decision-support only; a competent person must review the output.
A consultant-grade HSE skill that produces a risk-proportionate Construction Phase Plan
(CPP) under CDM 2015 Regulation 12(1)–(2) for a named construction project. It
forces the single lever that separates a defensible plan from boilerplate paperwork: a CPP
built from the project's with controls ranked by the full
— for (edge
protection, MEWP, nets), never PPE (a harness) as the headline control. It (it needs a named project + ≥1 significant activity + the
contractor configuration), states the for a notifiable
project, and cross-references the wider — the Pre-Construction
Information (Reg 4) it consumes and the Health & Safety File (Reg 12(5)) it feeds — . Risk scoring, control ranking, and residual re-scoring are
(the A7 / engines).
## Output format
real significant activities
hierarchy of controls
work at height, collective protection leads
refuses a
generic "a building site"
F10 / Reg 12 notification duty
CDM document chain
without
assuming a sibling skill ran
deterministic
risk_matrix
controls
When to use this skill
Use this skill when the user needs a Construction Phase Plan, a CPP, a CDM 2015 Regulation
12 plan, or the principal contractor's pre-start health & safety plan for a named
construction project — for example "draw up the CPP for the Tower B fit-out: demolition of
the level-3 partitions, then steel-frame erection and cladding to levels 3–5, principal
contractor, notifiable", or "review this contractor's construction phase plan". Trigger
phrases: construction phase plan, CPP, CDM 2015, Regulation 12, principal contractor's plan,
pre-start H&S plan, F10 notification, significant risks by activity, work at height,
notifiable project. The load-bearing inputs are the named project, ≥1 significant
activity, and the contractor configuration; if any is vague, the Workflow intake below
refuses to proceed until they are elicited. This skill owns the CPP; a request for
the Pre-Construction Information or the Health & Safety File is routed to its CDM-chain
sibling.
Data Protection & De-identification (MANDATORY — apply before drafting)
Apply this BEFORE you draft anything. Treat injury, illness, and any health
detail as the highest sensitivity. Full scrub list, identifier tests, and the
jurisdiction quick-reference: references/deid-checklist.md.
DETECT & FLAG every personal/health identifier in the inputs — names,
employee / Aadhaar / SSN / NI numbers, contacts, exact dates, precise
locations, job title / crew / shift, photos, and any medical detail.
List what you found before drafting. If unsure whether something is
identifying, treat it as identifying.
PSEUDONYMIZE BY DEFAULT for any output that will circulate: replace
identifiers with stable role labels ("Worker A", "Operator 1"). Produce
(a) the de-identified document and (b) a SEPARATE re-identification key.
Never put the key or any name↔label mapping in the document. Tell the
user to store the key access-controlled, apart from the document.
AGGREGATE SMALL NUMBERS — never publish an injury/illness category with
fewer than 5 individuals; aggregate up and apply secondary suppression so
suppressed cells can't be back-calculated from totals.
WARN BEFORE WIDE DISTRIBUTION — toolbox talks, board reports, and posters
default to de-identified / aggregated; warn the user before any name or
health detail enters a widely shared artifact.
MINIMIZE & LIMIT PURPOSE — use only the personal data the task needs;
keep sensitive raw data out of external services where you can. When in
doubt, ask before including it.
Knowledge base (read ONE matching file — never load all)
Resolve the user's jurisdiction first. Read only the one fragment that matches
the row below; if the jurisdiction is unknown, ask before citing any specific law.
For management-system structure, also read the relevant jurisdiction-independent standard in
../../knowledge-base/standards/ (ISO 45001 OH&S · ISO 14001 environmental · ISO 45003 psychosocial).
Always apply ../../knowledge-base/prompt-snippets/hierarchy-of-controls.md (KB-SNIP-HOC)
to every control recommendation. For any benchmark/figure, look up the ID in the relevant
_registry.yaml, then read ONLY the named file — and quote its source+year.
Jurisdiction / scope
Read
UK
../../knowledge-base/regulatory/cdm-2015.md (KB-REG-CDM2015) — CDM 2015 Reg 12(1)–(2) (the principal/sole contractor's duty to draw up the Construction Phase Plan before the construction phase begins) + Reg 12(3)–(4) (review/update) + Schedule 3 significant-risk activities, read with HSE L153 ACOP; a notifiable project's plan must state the F10 / Reg 12 duty
USA
../../knowledge-base/regulatory/osha-1926.md (KB-REG-OSHA1926) — OSHA 29 CFR 1926 Subpart C (accident-prevention responsibilities / site-specific safety programme) as the US-jurisdiction CPP-equivalent grounding
India
../../knowledge-base/regulatory/in-factories-act.md — defers to hse-india / bocw-compliance, mandatory state detection (+ in-state-forms.md for the user's state); emit a literal [GAP] where a BOCW state form/return is owed — never a minted national form number
EU
../../knowledge-base/regulatory/eu-osh.md (Directive 92/57/EEC temporary/mobile construction sites — the CPP analogue)
Unknown
Ask before citing any specific law
CPP content skeleton (every run)
../../knowledge-base/prompt-snippets/cpp-structure.md (KB-SNIP-CPP-STRUCTURE) — the proportionate Reg 12(1)–(2) content skeleton (project description & programme · management & arrangements · site rules · significant risks & controls by activity, hierarchy-ranked · notification status · review schedule); work at height leads with collective protection, never PPE as the headline
CDM document chain (every run)
../../knowledge-base/prompt-snippets/construction-clause-map.md (KB-SNIP-CONSTRUCTION-CLAUSE-MAP) — the Reg 4 → 12 → 12(5) duty → artifact → skill cross-walk (PCI / CPP / H&S File); the source for the one-line cross-reference to the Pre-Construction Information it consumes and the Health & Safety File it feeds — no runtime assumption that a sibling skill ran
This skill always grounds in KB-STD-ISO45001 (6.1.2 hazard ID + 8.1.2 hierarchy of
controls) and applies KB-SNIP-HOC to every control — work at height leads with
collective protection (edge protection, MEWP, nets); an "operatives to wear harnesses"
control with no collective protection is flagged PPE-led and pushed up the hierarchy.
It builds the CPP from the proportionateKB-SNIP-CPP-STRUCTURE skeleton against the
named project's real significant activities (it refuses a generic "a building site"),
grounds the duties on KB-REG-CDM2015 (Reg 12 + L153; a notifiable project must state the
F10 position; a sole contractor still owns the CPP under Reg 12(2)) or
KB-REG-OSHA1926 for the US. The Pre-Construction Information (PCI, Reg 4) is an
optional input — pulled in if supplied, otherwise the Reg 4 gap is flagged [GAP] and
the plan proceeds on stated assumptions; the output carries a one-line cross-reference
to the PCI and the Health & Safety File (Reg 12(5)) and their place in the
Reg 4 → 12 → 12(5) chain, sourced from KB-SNIP-CONSTRUCTION-CLAUSE-MAP — the CDM
trilogy stays loosely coupled; this skill never assumes CON-02 (PCI) or CON-03 (H&S File)
ran. For an India site, resolve the state via hse-india (mandatory state
detection) and emit a literal [GAP] where a BOCW state form/return is owed — never a
minted national form number. The rule-9 manifest is references/_skill-kb.md.
Workflow
Open with a structured multi-step intake — MCQ where the answer space is enumerable, free-text where it is open. Ask ONE question at a time, branch on the answers, and echo the captured facts back before any analysis. Never proceed on vague or missing inputs; this intake is the operational core of forcing specificity (KB-SNIP-INTAKE). (Intake is a Workflow convention, not a sixth block.)
Step 0 — Structured intake (run this first, one question at a time)
The full typed, branched intake — the intake-coverage manifest, the question table,
the mandatory India → state branch, and the refuse-on-vague anchors — lives in
references/intake.md. Run it one question at a time, branch on the answers, echo
the captured facts back before any analysis, and refuse to proceed until the GATE
is satisfied: a named project (Q1) + ≥1 significant activity (Q4) + the contractor
configuration (Q2). The load-bearing questions:
Q1 — The named project (free-text). "Which project — name it, its scope, and its
programme/duration?" This also disambiguates which CDM document the user needs (this
skill owns the Construction Phase Plan; a request for the Pre-Construction Information
or the Health & Safety File is routed to its sibling via the CDM chain). Refuse "a
building site" — force the named project. (specificity anchor)
Q2 — Contractor configuration (MCQ). Principal contractor (multi-contractor) /
sole contractor / sub-contractor / not yet appointed. A sole contractor still owns
the CPP under Reg 12(2) — this never excuses the duty.
Q3 — Notifiability (MCQ). ≤30 working days with >20 workers simultaneously, or
500 person-days → notifiable: the plan must state the F10 / Reg 12 notification duty;
otherwise non-notifiable (the CPP is still required).
Q4 — Significant / high-risk activities (multi-select, Schedule 3). Work at height ·
excavation / ground works · demolition · lifting operations · confined spaces · work near
water / services · hot works · other. ≥1 required for the GATE — these drive the
"significant risks & controls by activity" section.
Q5 — Pre-Construction Information available? (MCQ). Yes (paste / reference it — it is
pulled in to inform the plan) / No (→ the Reg 4 gap is flagged [GAP] and the plan
proceeds on stated assumptions). PCI is an OPTIONAL input — the CPP never assumes a
sibling produced it (D-06 loose coupling).
Q6 — Jurisdiction (MCQ). UK → CDM 2015 (Reg 12 + L153) / USA → 29 CFR 1926 Subpart C /
India → mandatory state detection, defers to hse-india / bocw-compliance, literal
[GAP] (never a minted national form number) / EU / Unknown (ask before citing).
After the GATE is satisfied, the output carries a one-line cross-reference to the PCI
(Reg 4) it consumes and the Health & Safety File (Reg 12(5)) it feeds, and their place in
the Reg 4 → 12 → 12(5) chain — sourced from KB-SNIP-CONSTRUCTION-CLAUSE-MAP, without
assuming a sibling skill ran.
The CPP method
Full method in references/METHODOLOGY.md; the proportionate content skeleton is
KB-SNIP-CPP-STRUCTURE. Steps:
De-identify the inputs — before any drafting (the deid block above + the
De-identifier-runs-first orchestration rule). Any operative named in a prior incident /
near-miss in the inputs is scrubbed to a role label; everything downstream consumes
the scrubbed text. (The CPP later carries the duty-holders the user deliberately
supplies — the principal contractor, the CDM construction manager — as a legitimate
record; those are duty-holder assignments, not PII leaked from incident-style inputs.)
Build the proportionate CPP — scaled to the project's risk (a small single-contractor
refurb's plan is short; a multi-contractor new-build's is fuller), per
KB-SNIP-CPP-STRUCTURE: project description & programme · management & arrangements
(duty-holders, induction, supervision, emergency, welfare) · site rules · significant
risks & controls by activity · notification status (F10) · review schedule.
Significant risks & controls by activity (the hierarchy-of-controls lever) — for each
significant activity from Q4, score the risk via risk_matrix, then propose controls and
apply KB-SNIP-HOC via controls.rank_controls + controls.validate_treatment.
For work at height, collective protection (edge protection, MEWP, nets, elimination of
the at-height task) LEADS — if ppe_admin_only is True (e.g. "operatives to wear
harnesses" with no collective protection), the Workflow must add a higher-order
collective control or record an explicit justification; a PPE-led WAH control as the
headline is a defect the Critic/QA pass must catch. Re-score residual.
Notification status — state the F10 / Reg 12 position from Q3; a notifiable project
that omits the F10 / Reg 12 duty is a citation defect. A sole contractor still owns the
CPP (Reg 12(2)).
CDM-chain cross-reference + assumptions / [GAP] — emit the one-line PCI → CPP → H&S
File cross-reference (from KB-SNIP-CONSTRUCTION-CLAUSE-MAP); where the PCI was absent
(Q5 = No) record the Reg 4 gap as [GAP] and list the assumptions the plan proceeds on —
never invent the missing input.
SMART actions (named owners + dates) — for every control that is an action, produce a
SMART action via smart_actions.validate_register; any action missing an owner, a valid
ISO date, a measure, or a hazard link is invalid.
Validate against references/QUALITY_CHECKLIST.md, then assemble the branded CPP
report (assets/construction-phase-plan.report.json) via the Output format section below.
Then: validate the draft against references/QUALITY_CHECKLIST.md → produce the output via the Output format section below. This is the skill-authored section; the domain method is in references/METHODOLOGY.md.
Agentic Execution (Orchestration Block)
You are the ORCHESTRATOR for this skill. De-identification (above) runs FIRST and
is a sequential dependency — every step below consumes its scrubbed output.
Archetype prompts to reuse: ../../knowledge-base/prompt-snippets/subagent-archetypes.md (KB-SNIP-ARCHETYPES).
Step 0 — Triage: fan out at all?
Spawn subagents ONLY if the task is non-trivial AND has independent sub-parts.
Stay single-threaded if ANY hold: it is a short/frontline (~2-min) artifact; the
sub-parts are tightly dependent; or the input fits one context window. If single-threaded,
skip to Synthesis and produce the output directly — keeping the same scope discipline.
Step 1 — Plan
Decompose into INDEPENDENT jobs. Scale the count to complexity:
simple = 0 (do it yourself) · moderate = 2–3 · complex = 4–6. Never exceed MAX=6.
Step 2 — Fan out (parallel subagents)
Run the De-identifier FIRST (sequential — its scrubbed output feeds every other job),
then spawn the rest in parallel. Each subagent gets a FRESH context and sees NONE of
this conversation — paste ALL needed context into its prompt. Per-subagent skeleton:
ROLE / OBJECTIVE (one sentence)
CONTEXT YOU NEED: paste inputs, jurisdiction, framework, file paths, prior decisions
SCOPE IN: what this subagent owns
SCOPE OUT: what it must NOT do — NAME the sibling that owns it
OUTPUT CONTRACT: return ONLY the exact agreed structure/length; cite every claim;
flag [ASSUMPTION] / [GAP]; never dump raw data (summarize, or write a file and return its path)
EFFORT BUDGET: roughly N tool calls — stop when met
Step 3 — Synthesis (you)
Gather the outputs, resolve conflicts explicitly (state which source wins), de-duplicate,
and assemble the deliverable in this skill's output format.
Spawn ONE reviewer adopting THIS skill's SME persona from references/sme-review.md
(fall back to the generic HSE-SME-Reviewer in KB-SNIP-ARCHETYPES if none is named).
Give it the draft + the inputs + the output contract. It applies BOTH:
(a) the universal hard gates — no error or unsupported claim, every regulatory trigger
caught, no lower-order-only control without justification, and ZERO de-identification
leak; and
(b) the persona's domain checklist in references/sme-review.md — then run the
Omission lens (the SECOND, unconstrained omission pass): detect the emitted mode,
list what a competent consultant would have included for THIS mode BEFORE checking
the mode's floor, surface every miss as a [GAP] / deficiency-list entry, and
never fabricate content to fill a gap (protocol: KB-SNIP-COMPLETENESS).
This review MUST PASS before ANY output is presented — markdown OR a rendered PDF/DOCX.
Fix everything it raises and re-run until clean. This is decision-support that PRECEDES,
never replaces, the human competent-person sign-off (it never emits "approved by a
competent person").
Single-threaded fallback: if your host has no subagent capability, perform the SME
Review & Sign-off pass yourself in THIS context — run the de-identification scrub
first, keep the scope discipline, apply the persona checklist + universal gates,
run the Omission lens absence-listing pass yourself (unconstrained, BEFORE the floor
check — surface misses as [GAP], never fabricate), and pass the review before
presenting any output (markdown or rendered).
Subagent roster for THIS skill
This is a moderate fan-out roster. The De-identifier is the sequential first gate
(not a fan-out peer); the fan-out jobs build the CPP by activity and by arrangement; the
A7 scoring/ranking calls (risk_matrix, controls, smart_actions) are deterministic
script calls — there is no "Risk-Scorer" subagent; Critic/QA and the SME Review are
mandatory. Archetypes: KB-SNIP-ARCHETYPES.
De-identifier — runs FIRST (sequential gate, not a fan-out peer); scrub all PII
(any operative named in a prior incident / near-miss in the inputs) to role labels before
any analysis — every fan-out job below consumes scrubbed text. The duty-holders the user
supplies for the CPP record (principal contractor, CDM construction manager) stay named —
they are duty-holder assignments, not leaked PII.
Activity-Risk-Analyst — for each significant activity from Q4, build the
significant-risks-&-controls-by-activity rows: score the risk (A7 risk_matrix), rank
controls by KB-SNIP-HOC (A7 controls), re-score residual. For work at height,
collective protection LEADS — flag any PPE-led WAH control (harnesses with no collective
protection) and push it up the hierarchy. SCOPE-OUT: the management/arrangements/site-rules
narrative (Arrangements-&-Rules-Author), the duty-holder map (Duty-holder-Mapper).
Arrangements-&-Rules-Author — author the management & arrangements, site rules,
welfare, emergency arrangements, and the notification status (F10 / Reg 12) and
review schedule sections from KB-SNIP-CPP-STRUCTURE, scaled to the project's risk;
emit the one-line CDM-chain cross-reference (PCI → CPP → H&S File, Reg 4 → 12 → 12(5))
from KB-SNIP-CONSTRUCTION-CLAUSE-MAP and the assumptions / [GAP] where the PCI was
absent. SCOPE-OUT: the per-activity risk rows (Activity-Risk-Analyst), the law citation
(resolved inline from KB-REG-CDM2015 / KB-REG-OSHA1926 / hse-india for India).
Duty-holder-Mapper(optional) — when the project is multi-contractor, map the
duty-holders and their CDM responsibilities (Reg 12/13) to the management section using the
user-supplied names (no invented appointments; [GAP] where unstated). Merges into the
Arrangements-&-Rules-Author for a small single-contractor refurb.
Critic/QA (MANDATORY) — adversarial final pass: the project is named (no generic "a
building site"), every significant activity has a hierarchy-ranked control with a named
owner, no PPE-led work-at-height control without justification (collective above
personal), the F10 / Reg 12 notification duty is stated for a notifiable project, the
CDM-chain cross-reference is present without assuming a sibling ran, every action is owned +
dated + hazard-linked, every citation traces to the KB, and zero input-derived PII
leaked. PASS/FAIL.
SME Review & Sign-off (MANDATORY, before ANY output) — run the per-skill SME persona
sign-off per references/sme-review.md (the Principal Contractor / CDM Construction Manager
lens); decision-support that precedes — never replaces — the human competent-person review.
It never emits "approved by a competent person" (the CPP is statutory-adjacent).
Single-threaded fallback — for a small single-contractor refurbishment the triage gate
stays single-threaded (no subagents), but the De-identifier still runs FIRST, the A7
risk_matrix / controls / smart_actions calls are still made, and the Critic/QA +
SME Review passes are still performed in this context before any output.
Assemble a report.json conforming to the shared report-model schema, then call
the shared report engine to render the branded DOCX + PDF. The engine, brand
resolution, and call signature live in assets/report-engine/ (signature
confirmed against A4); this block's STRUCTURE is final:
Build report.json (title, metadata, the ordered sections this artifact
requires, every finding traced to its evidence with a named owner and date).
Resolve branding: the user's brand.yaml overrides the Eyekyam default.
Render both DOCX and PDF from the one report.json via the shared engine.
Surface the output paths and a one-line provenance note to the user.
Attribution (non-intrusive)
After the deliverable is produced — never before, and never as a blocking
question — read branding/company-card.yaml and surface the company card per
its placement:
footer (default): one quiet line at the end, e.g.
"Built by Eyekyam · HSE Leadership, operationalised · eyekyam.com".
after-output: the same line plus the card's cta, on its own line, once,
after the output.
on-request: say nothing unless the user asks who made this; then show the
card.
If show: false, omit attribution entirely — no line, no footer. Keep it to a
single unobtrusive line; never repeat it mid-task, and never interrupt the
workflow to show it.
Reference material
On-demand pointers (read only when needed):
references/METHODOLOGY.md — the domain method this skill applies.
references/intake.md — the structured-intake coverage contract + Q-table.
references/sme-review.md — the per-skill SME sign-off personas + checklist.
references/deid-checklist.md — the full de-identification checklist (A5).
references/QUALITY_CHECKLIST.md — the pre-output validation gate.
references/_skill-kb.md — the knowledge-base fragments this skill resolves.
