Capability Scanner
Use this skill to assess whether a product, implementation, model-access record, or provider belongs in the AI Capability Reference.
Load references/GOVERNANCE.md when:
- a candidate seems borderline
- ontology placement is unclear
- you need the current capability taxonomy or scope heuristic
- you need the current tracked set for comparison
Load references/SCAN_WORKFLOW.md when:
- you are running a broader scan rather than evaluating one candidate
- you need signal-gathering guidance
- you need source-priority or recommendation conventions
Core Job
For each candidate:
- Determine what kind of thing it is.
- Check whether it is consumer-facing, commercially available, or practically usable by an ordinary person.
- Assess whether tracking it would materially help the audience understand capabilities, access, constraints, or deployment choices.
- Recommend one of:
ADD,UPDATE,WATCH,SKIP. - Cite the best available sources, preferring official sources.
Output Format
Use this structure:
CANDIDATE: [brief name]
ENTITY TYPE: [Capability | Implementation | Product | Provider | Plan | Surface | Deployment Mode | Model Access | Constraint]
PROVIDER: [if applicable]
PRODUCT: [if applicable]
WHAT CHANGED:
[1-2 sentence summary]
ONTOLOGY FIT:
- Why this entity type is correct
- Any entity-type ambiguity that remains
CAPABILITY MAPPING:
- [capability slug]
- [capability slug]
SCOPE ASSESSMENT:
- Commercially available or practically usable: [Yes/No + reason]
- Audience relevance: [Yes/No + reason]
- Affects capability, access, or deployment choice: [Yes/No + reason]
RECOMMENDATION: [ADD | UPDATE | WATCH | SKIP]
RATIONALE:
- [short point]
- [short point]
EVIDENCE:
- [Official source]
- [Official source]
- [Secondary source, if useful]
OPEN QUESTIONS:
- [only if needed]
Decision Rules
- Prefer official sources over press coverage.
- Do not treat a marketing name as a capability.
- Do not treat a model family as a product.
- Do not force open/self-hosted things into one bucket.
- Treat
~1% market shareas a heuristic, not a hard threshold. - Use
WATCHfor borderline candidates or incomplete evidence. - If the case is weak, do not invent certainty.
What To Look For
Good candidates usually involve one of these:
- a new consumer-facing product with meaningful public visibility
- a new implementation on an already tracked product
- a pricing or entitlement change that affects user decisions
- a meaningful new surface or deployment option
- an open model family or runtime that real people can select or run locally
Usually skip:
- enterprise infrastructure with no clear end-user product
- API-only changes with no user-facing impact
- minor renames or vague model-quality claims
- obscure releases that do not clear the audience-relevance bar
Watchlist Rule
If a candidate may belong but does not clearly justify active tracking yet,
recommend WATCH rather than ADD. Treat that as a watchlist candidate,
not a failed evaluation.
Related Skill
Use the capability-audit skill instead when:
- You want to check whether existing tracked products are correctly mapped to a capability
- A capability card looks thin (too few products listed) and you want to know why
- You've added a new capability definition and want to populate it from existing data
The scanner evaluates incoming candidates (one at a time, from outside). The capability audit checks internal completeness (systematically, across all tracked products for a given capability).