Individual skill
safety-stock-review
Size or audit safety stock with assumption checks - the z*sigma*sqrt(LT) formula plus an empirical stress test of what it actually delivers (cycle service vs fill rate) per variability class. Use when the user mentions safety stock, emniyet stoku, emniyet stoğu, reorder point, service level, stok seviyesi belirleme. Differentiator - refuses to hand back a number without validating the demand-distribution assumptions behind it.
skills-imported/safety-stock-review/SKILL.md
Source commit faf37c0859ebf627bfcb5225e8057d088691e0ae
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- No
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 8, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 54
- Repository last updated
- Oct 10, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- agent-skills Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- ai-agents-automation Repository topic
- ai-skills Repository topic
- awesome Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- chatgpt Repository topic
- claude-skills Repository topic
- meta-ai Repository topic
- muse-ai Repository topic
- security Derived category
- testing Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Read excerpt
# Safety Stock Review
The textbook formula assumes roughly normal demand. Real portfolios contain SKUs where that assumption fails badly - the skill's job is to compute the number AND say where it can be trusted.
## Required data
Per-SKU demand history (`sku`, `period`, `qty`, 12+ periods), lead time (with variability if available), and the service target. Clarify early **which service the target means**: cycle service (probability of no stockout per cycle) or fill rate (share of units served) - contracts usually mean fill rate, formulas usually compute cycle service.
## Workflow
1. **Classify first.** Compute CV and zero-period share per SKU. For CV >= 1.0 or intermittent demand, state up front that the normal-formula result will be optimistic.
2. **Compute the formula result:** SS = z * sigma_d * sqrt(LT), ROP = mu_d * LT + SS (demand-period units consistent with LT). If lead time varies, use the extended form with the sigma_LT term - ignoring lead-time variance is the most common silent understatement.
3. **Stress-test empirically.** Set stock at mu + SS and replay the actual history: report both achieved cycle service (share of periods fully covered) and achieved fill rate (units served / units demanded). Zero-demand periods pass cycle service for free - fill rate is the honest one on intermittent items.
4. **Show the cost of nines.** SS at 90/95/98/99% targets for the SKUs in question - service targets are pricing decisions, and the curve makes that visible.