About requirements-analysis-plus
requirements-analysis-plus is a skill for analyzing requirements across multiple documents, with emphasis on risk-based prioritization, conflicts, and follow-up questions. It guides agents to produce actionable drafts while marking assumptions and gaps.
Key features
- 01Cross-document requirement analysis
- 02Risk and business-impact prioritization
- 03Conflict and inconsistency checks
- 04Assumptions and gaps marked
- 05Optional role-report inputs
Use cases
- 01Analyzing requirements from several source documents
- 02Prioritizing high-impact requirements and risks
- 03Drafting requirements when information is incomplete
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/ / github.com/ naodeng/ awesome-qa-skills --skill requirements-analysis-plusAfter installing, type/requirements-analysis-plusin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled files
References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.
README.mdagents/openai.yamlevals/eval.yamlevals/cases/basic-success.yamledge-incomplete-input.yamledge-risk-priority.yamledge-role-artifact-input.yamlreview-repair-regression.yamlevals/graders/review-repair-regression.pyexamples/requirements-sample.analysis.mdrequirements-sample.jsonrequirements-sample.mdoutput-templates/template-markdown.mdprompts/requirements-analysis-plus.mdreferences/script-contract.mdreferences/local/requirements-analysis_EN.mdscripts/common_parser.pyevidence_scaffold.pyparse_excel.pyparse_html.pyparse_json.pyparse_markdown.pyparse_word.pyrun_analysis.pyxlsx_reader.pyDetails
From the project READMErequirements-analysis-plus (EN)
Chinese version: See the corresponding Chinese skill.
When to Use
- Need deeper requirement analysis across multiple source documents.
- Need stronger prioritization, conflict checks, and follow-up questions than the base version.
Script capability boundary
Optional scripts/run_*.py prepare parsed evidence or source candidates with NOT_ASSESSED. They do not call a model, execute the main prompt, or produce semantic conclusions, risk priorities, complete cases, or approval. An agent performs the main prompt. Read references/script-contract.md before running helpers.
Workflow
- Read and follow the main prompt listed under Progressive disclosure (coverage, structure, quality bar).
- Direct requirement materials remain sufficient for standalone use. If the user supplies role reports with a declared
source_role, treat them as optional composition inputs and never require installing a role Skill. - Add only project context that changes the result: scope, environment, constraints, risks, dependencies, expected deliverable.
- If input is incomplete, return a usable first draft and explicitly mark assumptions and gaps.
- Default to Markdown; switch formats only when the user asks.
Core Constraints
- Prioritize by risk / business impact — do not treat everything equally.
- Separate confirmed facts from current assumptions.
- Do not invent endpoints, fields, environments, or root causes the user did not provide.
- When using a fact, view, risk, or question from a role report, preserve its source-role attribution item by item; never present a role view as a primary requirement fact or anonymous consensus.
- Consume only report content supplied by the user; do not read, link to, or depend on another role Skill's internal files.
- Keep output executable: concrete scenarios, clear priority, clear next steps.
Progressive Disclosure
- Before producing output, read and follow
prompts/requirements-analysis-plus.md(minimum coverage, output structure, quality bar). - When a ready-made template fits: use matching files under
output-templates/. - When the user wants examples or alignment with existing assets: read relevant
examples/. - For deep framework/troubleshoot/schema notes: read only the relevant file(s) under
references/, do not load the whole directory. - For format conversion or helper checks: prefer existing
scripts/over reinventing. - For evaluating/regressing this skill: use
evals/with skill-up.
Pre-delivery Checklist
- Followed the main prompt's output structure
- Minimum coverage focus: source alignment, scope summary, conflicts and inconsistencies, missing rules, testability risks, dependency impacts, business impact, priority by risk, ... (details in main prompt)
- Covered the minimum checklist, or explained omissions
- High-risk items have explicit priority
- Did not invent details the user did not provide
- Assumptions and gaps are marked
- Findings, risks, and open questions that use role reports retain their source roles
- Optional role reports did not become prerequisites and no role Skill internal file was linked
Common Pitfalls
- Do not pretend completeness when scope/context is missing.
- Do not treat every item as equally important.
- Do not skip assumptions and information gaps.
- Do not dump generic theory unrelated to the current toolchain.