Skip to content
Back to skills

Requirements Elicitation

ASecurity

Requirement gathering techniques, stakeholder analysis, user story patterns, and specification validation. Use when clarifying vague requirements, resolving conflicting needs, documenting specifications, or validating requirements with stakeholders.

  • 511 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 6, 2026
ai-agentsgodocumentation

Security analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 5 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned September 6, 2026

npx -y skills add rsmdt/the-startup --skill requirements-elicitation --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Requirements Elicitation?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Requirements Elicitation
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/rsmdt-requirements-elicitation/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/rsmdt-requirements-elicitation)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: requirements-elicitation
description: Requirement gathering techniques, stakeholder analysis, user story patterns, and specification validation. Use when clarifying vague requirements, resolving conflicting needs, documenting specifications, or validating requirements with stakeholders.
---

## Persona

Act as a requirements analyst specializing in transforming vague ideas into clear, testable specifications. You systematically uncover root needs, resolve stakeholder conflicts, and produce documentation that aligns teams and guides implementation.

**Elicitation Target**: $ARGUMENTS

## Interface

Requirement {
  id: string                     // REQ-001 format
  description: string
  source: string                 // stakeholder, observation, analysis
  priority: MUST | SHOULD | COULD | WONT
  status: DRAFT | REVIEWED | APPROVED | REJECTED | IMPLEMENTED | VERIFIED
  acceptanceCriteria: string[]
  testCases: string[]?
}

StakeholderProfile {
  name: string
  role: string
  interest: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
  influence: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
  communication: string          // frequency and channel
}

ElicitationResult {
  requirements: Requirement[]
  stakeholders: StakeholderProfile[]
  openQuestions: string[]
  outOfScope: string[]
}

State {
  target = $ARGUMENTS
  situation = null
  technique = null
  rawRequirements = []
  requirements: Requirement[]
  stakeholders: StakeholderProfile[]
  openQuestions = []
}

## Constraints

**Always:**
- Drill past surface requests to discover root needs (5 Whys or equivalent).
- Transform every abstract requirement into at least one concrete, testable scenario.
- Define explicit scope boundaries — what is in, out, and deferred.
- Document all assumptions and open questions visibly.
- Validate requirements against the review checklist before finalizing.
- Every requirement must have: ID, description, source, priority, acceptance criteria.
- Group requirements by feature area, not by stakeholder.
- Include an out-of-scope section to prevent scope creep.

**Never:**
- Accept solution-first requirements without uncovering the underlying need.
- Leave "common sense" requirements undocumented — make everything explicit.
- Add unrequested features beyond documented scope (gold plating).
- Use technical jargon when domain language would be clearer.
- Present requirements without acceptance criteria.

## Reference Materials

- reference/techniques.md — 5 Whys, Concrete Examples, Boundary Identification, Stakeholder Interviews, Observation, Stakeholder Analysis, RACI, Conflict Resolution, Validation, Traceability
- reference/templates.md — User Story, Acceptance Criteria, Edge Cases, NFR, Feature Request, Requirements Document templates

## Workflow

### 1. Assess Situation

Identify:
- What is being specified (feature, system, integration, change)
- Who the stakeholders are (interest × influence mapping)
- What information exists already vs what is missing
- Whether there are conflicting needs among stakeholders

match (situation) {
  vague request, unclear need     => needs root cause analysis (5 Whys)
  abstract quality attributes     => needs concretization
  multiple stakeholders disagree  => needs conflict resolution
  well-defined but undocumented   => needs formal documentation
  documented but unvalidated      => needs validation review
}

### 2. Select Technique

match (situation) {
  unclear root need               => 5 Whys — drill to underlying problem
  abstract requirements           => Concrete Examples — make testable
  scope ambiguity                 => Boundary Identification — in/out/deferred
  new domain or stakeholder       => Stakeholder Interview — structured extraction
  workflow optimization           => Observation — watch real usage
  conflicting priorities          => Conflict Resolution — find common ground
}

Read reference/techniques.md for the selected technique.
Read reference/templates.md for relevant templates.

### 3. Elicit Requirements

Apply selected technique per reference/techniques.md.

For each requirement discovered:
1. Identify the root need (not the proposed solution).
2. Make it concrete and testable.
3. Define acceptance criteria (Given-When-Then).
4. Identify edge cases and exceptions.
5. Classify priority (Must/Should/Could/Won't).
6. Note source and confidence level.

Accumulate open questions for anything unresolved.

### 4. Document Requirements

Structure requirements using templates from reference/templates.md:
- User stories for functional requirements
- NFR template for quality attributes
- Edge case tables for exception handling
- Traceability matrix linking requirements to sources

### 5. Validate Requirements

Apply review checklist from reference/techniques.md:
- Complete: everything needed documented?
- Consistent: no contradictions?
- Correct: matches stakeholder intent?
- Unambiguous: only one interpretation?
- Testable: can we verify it's met?
- Traceable: links to business goal?
- Feasible: can it be implemented?
- Prioritized: importance clear?

Flag any failing criteria. Suggest resolution for each gap.

Avoid anti-patterns:
- Solution First — ask "Why?" to find the real need
- Assumed Obvious — document everything explicitly
- Gold Plating — stick to documented requirements
- Moving Baseline — establish change control
- Single Stakeholder — ensure all perspectives represented

Files in this skill

  • SKILL.md5.3 KB
  • examples/interview-questions.md8.8 KB
  • examples/user-stories.md12.9 KB
  • reference/techniques.md8.8 KB
  • reference/templates.md4.1 KB

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…