Design Manufacturing Execution System (MES) architectures, capability maps, execution flows, and plant-system integration boundaries. Use when Codex needs to scope MES responsibilities, model site or line structures, define work-order/WIP/traceability/quality behavior, assign ownership across ERP/APS/WMS/QMS/LIMS/SCADA/PLC, or review phased MES rollout options.
Use this skill to turn a manufacturing problem statement into an MES design that is bounded, implementable, and rollout-aware. Prefer explicit ownership, traceability, and exception handling over vague platform diagrams.
Capture the production mode first: discrete, batch, process, or hybrid. Identify site topology, routing rigidity, takt or batch cadence, genealogy depth, regulatory constraints, offline tolerance, and operator language or role variation.
If the request is underspecified, make an explicit working assumption and continue. Only stop to ask when the answer changes architecture or compliance posture in a material way.
State what MES owns and what it does not own before proposing modules. Be specific about the boundary with ERP, APS, WMS, QMS, LIMS, SCADA, PLC, historian, and maintenance systems.
Use references/integration-boundaries.md when defining ownership or integration direction.
Cover the minimum capability slices needed for execution:
Use references/mes-capability-map.md to decide which capabilities belong in the first release and which can remain adjacent-system responsibilities.
Define the canonical identifiers and lifecycle states for order, operation, resource, equipment, material lot or serial, genealogy unit, and quality record. Make state transitions explicit, especially for hold, rework, scrap, partial completion, and override flows.
Use references/execution-model-checklist.md when the request involves traceability, exception paths, or execution-state reviews.
Choose the simplest architecture that fits the plant reality. Call out:
Prefer reusable modules or bounded services around stable responsibilities rather than around every screen or table.
Design for coexistence with current tools, spreadsheets, manual stations, or legacy MES functions. Phase delivery by operational value and adoption risk, not by abstract technical layers alone.
Include data migration, cutover, training, and fallback paths for any design that changes shop-floor execution.
When asked to design, review, or compare MES options, produce this structure unless the user requests another format:
references/mes-capability-map.md for a practical MES capability breakdown and release-scoping prompts.references/integration-boundaries.md for ownership boundaries, interface direction, and common anti-patterns.references/execution-model-checklist.md for object models, execution states, and realistic failure-mode prompts.