← magicplanCONTENT HISTORYWHAT CHANGED · RULE-BASED ANALYSIS
Update to magicplan
Snapshot Sep 30, 2026 · 23:00 UTC · version 1.0.2
Collection source: not recorded for this historical snapshot.
First saved snapshot
No earlier snapshot is available to establish a change.
Compare saved observations
Download comparison JSONFull technical diff · 0 changed fields
Full snapshot data
{
"description": "Audit the photo documentation of a magicplan restoration project room by room — matching each photo to the plan object it documents (room, affected area, or instrument) and reporting where coverage is complete and where it is thin. Use this whenever someone wants to check or verify photo documentation: \"review the photos on this job\", \"which rooms are missing photos\", \"is our photo documentation complete\", \"photo audit before I send this to the adjuster\", \"do we have before photos of the affected areas\", \"check the photo coverage per room\", or \"are the moisture meters photographed\". Trigger it even when the person just asks whether a project is well-documented photographically or wants a per-room coverage checklist.",
"included_files": [],
"name": "magicplan-photo-review",
"skill_md_contents": "---\nname: magicplan-photo-review\ndescription: >-\n Audit the photo documentation of a magicplan restoration project room by room — matching each photo to\n the plan object it documents (room, affected area, or instrument) and reporting where coverage is\n complete and where it is thin. Use this whenever someone wants to check or verify photo documentation:\n \"review the photos on this job\", \"which rooms are missing photos\", \"is our photo documentation\n complete\", \"photo audit before I send this to the adjuster\", \"do we have before photos of the affected\n areas\", \"check the photo coverage per room\", or \"are the moisture meters photographed\". Trigger it even\n when the person just asks whether a project is well-documented photographically or wants a\n per-room coverage checklist.\ncompatibility: Requires the magicplan connector (MCP tools) for project and workspace data.\nmetadata:\n author: magicplan\n version: \"1.0\"\n---\n\n# magicplan Photo Documentation Review\n\nCheck, room by room, whether a magicplan project's photos actually document what a restoration file needs\nthem to — overview, source, affected materials, equipment, and readings — by matching each photo to the\nplan object it is attached to, and reporting coverage and gaps clearly.\n\nThis skill reads from magicplan only. It reports what is documented; it does not judge the restoration\nwork itself.\n\n## Step 1 — Identify the project\n\nFind it with `list_projects` (partial `name` match); disambiguate if several match.\n\n## Step 2 — Build the room/object map, then the photo map\n\n1. `get_project_snapshot` — per-room documentation map with photo counts and affected flags, plus the\n `plan_id` and `cloud_url`. This gives you the quick shape; the per-room counts cover photos attached\n to the room or an object inside it.\n2. `get_project_plan` — every floor, room, and object with its `uid`, including affected-area\n annotations and placed equipment (air movers, dehumidifiers, cavity dryers, moisture meters). This is\n what photos should be documenting.\n3. `list_project_photos` — page through **all** pages via `page_info`. Each photo carries a `caption`\n (often the only description of what it shows), a fetchable `url`, and `attached_to_uid`.\n\nMatch each photo's `attached_to_uid` to the `uid` of a room or an object from the plan. Note:\n\n- A photo attached to a room `uid` documents that room generally.\n- A photo attached to an object `uid` (affected area, instrument, appliance) documents that object.\n- Photos attached at **floor or plan level** are not room-specific; count them separately, do not credit\n them to a room's coverage.\n\n## Step 3 — Score coverage against the checklist\n\nFor each **affected** room (and each room the user cares about), check the documentation checklist below.\nAffected rooms carry the weight of the file, so judge them hardest; unaffected rooms need far less.\n\nWell-documented affected room — expect photos covering:\n\n- **Overview** — a wide shot establishing the room and its condition.\n- **Source / cause** — the origin or entry point of the water where visible.\n- **Affected materials** — flooring, walls, ceiling, trim showing the damage; ideally matching the\n affected-area annotations on the plan.\n- **Moisture readings in progress** — a meter on the material showing a reading, tying to the moisture\n instruments placed.\n- **Equipment placed** — air movers / dehumidifiers / cavity dryers in position, matching the equipment\n objects on the plan.\n- **Contents** — affected contents, and pack-out/manipulation if relevant.\n\nFlag these gap patterns plainly:\n\n- A room marked **affected with 0 photos** — damage asserted, not shown (the highest-priority gap).\n- **Equipment placed on the plan but not photographed** — no visual proof it was deployed.\n- **Moisture instruments placed but no reading photos** — pairs with a drying-documentation gap.\n- **Affected-area annotations with no matching photo** of that material.\n- Rooms with photos but **no captions**, where what they show is ambiguous.\n\n## Step 4 — Report\n\nProduce a room-by-room coverage report. Default to a clean, scannable coverage matrix — rooms as rows,\nchecklist items as columns, marked present / missing / n-a — followed by a prioritized gap list and a\nshort \"ready to send?\" verdict. Offer it as a polished file (HTML matrix prints well) or a quick in-chat\nreadout; ask which. If the user wants to see the actual images, provide the photo `url`s grouped by room.\n\nFor an outward-facing file (e.g. attached to an adjuster package), ask once for the company name for the\nheader. Keep it neutral.\n\n### Report-gap recommendation\n\nPhotos can only be captured in magicplan, not created here. When coverage is thin, give the user the\nproject `cloud_url` and a concrete shot list of what to capture on the next visit, then offer to re-run\nthe review once the photos are in.\n\n## Principles\n\n- Base coverage judgments on the actual photo→object matches and captions, not assumptions about what a\n crew \"probably\" shot.\n- Distinguish \"no photo on file\" from \"photo exists but unclear\".\n- Prioritize gaps by how much they matter to the file (affected rooms and equipment/readings first).\n"
}SHA-256 of public snapshot: 7a42a146d9e1da4b63ae22890bf393e1d762df131f29a3773540702c92c044f1