{"id":18553,"plugin_id":"plugins_6a8b0781ab00819195ee67859b81e9aa","kind":"skill","collection_source":null,"comparison_source":null,"observed_at":"2026-09-30T23:14:51.442Z","digest":"ec24b0684aff63cc57b824906e200171d2e48ac1e25477c76e3663ebcde6eba1","against":null,"payload":{"description":"Create a new workplace safety and health risk assessment aligned with Singapore's WSH Risk Management Code of Practice. Use for task decomposition, hazard and consequence identification, existing-control evaluation, 5x5 risk evaluation, additional-control selection, and projected residual risk. Do not use merely to audit an existing RA or track control implementation.","included_files":[{"relative_path":"references/Appendix A Specific Hazard Examples.txt","size_in_bytes":14029},{"relative_path":"references/Appendix B Control Measures Library.txt","size_in_bytes":17132},{"relative_path":"references/Appendix C Activity-to-Hazard Mapping Library.txt","size_in_bytes":11122},{"relative_path":"references/Appendix D Consequence Library.txt","size_in_bytes":10091},{"relative_path":"references/Output Format.txt","size_in_bytes":1735},{"relative_path":"references/control-selection.md","size_in_bytes":8897},{"relative_path":"references/core-methodology.md","size_in_bytes":10015},{"relative_path":"references/human-organisational-factors.md","size_in_bytes":3806},{"relative_path":"references/risk-scoring.md","size_in_bytes":10484},{"relative_path":"references/specialised-hazards.md","size_in_bytes":18217}],"name":"wsh-risk-assessment","skill_md_contents":"---\nname: wsh-risk-assessment\ndescription: Create a new workplace safety and health risk assessment aligned with Singapore's WSH Risk Management Code of Practice. Use for task decomposition, hazard and consequence identification, existing-control evaluation, 5x5 risk evaluation, additional-control selection, and projected residual risk. Do not use merely to audit an existing RA or track control implementation.\n---\n\n# Create a WSH Risk Assessment\n\nBuild a site-specific draft with the people who know the work. Library entries are prompts, not evidence. Label missing information and assumptions, and never claim compliance, approval, completeness, or competent-person endorsement.\n\n## Input gate\n\nBefore creating task-specific rows or scores, obtain: workplace and location; scope and task steps; exposed groups; equipment, tools, materials and substances; and controls actually in place. Do not replace these inputs with generic examples. Ask once for any missing essentials.\n\n## References\n\nRead [core methodology](references/core-methodology.md), [risk scoring](references/risk-scoring.md), and [output format](references/Output Format.txt). Read only the relevant additional material:\n\n- [Specialised hazards](references/specialised-hazards.md) for chemical, biological, radiation, lifecycle, or exposure-route issues.\n- [Human and organisational factors](references/human-organisational-factors.md) when workload, competence, communication, supervision, fatigue, or organisational conditions may affect risk.\n- [Control selection](references/control-selection.md) when proposing additional controls.\n- Appendices A-D for hazard, control, activity, and consequence prompts.\n\nUser-supplied methodology and scoring thresholds take precedence unless they conflict with safety, law, or the current request; flag conflicts.\n\n## Assessment rules\n\n- Work at task or sub-task level. Use one row per meaningful hazard-consequence pathway.\n- Record only existing controls represented as currently implemented and functioning.\n- Score current risk after considering those existing controls.\n- Recommend additional controls in hierarchy order and identify owner, target date/status, and effectiveness measure.\n- Do not lower severity merely because administrative controls or PPE are proposed unless the credible consequence genuinely changes.\n- Residual scores based on unimplemented controls are **projected**, not verified. Confirm them only after implementation evidence and effectiveness checks.\n- Apply risk bands only when an authoritative organisational scheme is supplied. Otherwise report S, L, and RPN without inventing Low/Medium/High thresholds.\n\nEnd with site-validation and management-approval notes. Suggest natural-language next steps rather than command keywords.\n"},"changes":[],"summary":"First saved snapshot. No earlier version is available for comparison.","summary_kind":"deterministic","summary_metadata":{}}