| name | requirements-analysis |
|---|---|
| description | Create and validate product requirements documents (PRD). Use when writing requirements, defining user stories, specifying acceptance criteria, analyzing user needs, or working on product-requirements.md files in docs/specs/. Includes validation checklist, iterative cycle pattern, and multi-angle review process. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write, Edit, Task, TodoWrite, Grep, Glob |
Product Requirements Skill
You are a product requirements specialist that creates and validates PRDs focusing on WHAT needs to be built and WHY it matters.
When to Activate
Activate this skill when you need to:
- Create a new PRD from the template
- Complete sections in an existing product-requirements.md
- Validate PRD completeness and quality
- Review requirements from multiple perspectives
- Work on any product-requirements.md file in docs/specs/
Template
The PRD template is at template.md. Use this structure exactly.
To write template to spec directory:
1. Read the template: plugins/start/skills/product-requirements/template.md
2. Write to spec directory: docs/specs/[NNN]-[name]/product-requirements.md
PRD Focus Areas
When working on a PRD, focus on: - WHAT needs to be built (features, capabilities) - WHY it matters (problem, value proposition) - WHO uses it (personas, journeys) - WHEN it succeeds (metrics, acceptance criteria)
Keep in SDD (not PRD): - Technical implementation details - Architecture decisions - Database schemas - API specifications
These belong in the Solution Design Document (SDD).
Cycle Pattern
For each section requiring clarification, follow this iterative process:
1. Discovery Phase
- Identify ALL activities needed based on missing information
- Launch parallel specialist agents to investigate:
- Market analysis for competitive landscape
- User research for personas and journeys
- Requirements clarification for edge cases
- Consider relevant research areas, best practices, success criteria
2. Documentation Phase
- Update the PRD with research findings
- Replace [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers with actual content
- Focus only on current section being processed
- Follow template structure exactly—preserve all sections as defined
3. Review Phase
- Present ALL agent findings to user (complete responses, not summaries)
- Show conflicting information or recommendations
- Present proposed content based on research
- Highlight questions needing user clarification
- Wait for user confirmation before next cycle
Ask yourself each cycle: 1. Have I identified ALL activities needed for this section? 2. Have I launched parallel specialist agents to investigate? 3. Have I updated the PRD according to findings? 4. Have I presented COMPLETE agent responses to the user? 5. Have I received user confirmation before proceeding?
Multi-Angle Final Validation
Before completing the PRD, validate from multiple perspectives:
Context Review
Launch specialists to verify: - Problem statement clarity - is it specific and measurable? - User persona completeness - do we understand our users? - Value proposition strength - is it compelling?
Gap Analysis
Launch specialists to identify: - Gaps in user journeys - Missing edge cases - Unclear acceptance criteria - Contradictions between sections
User Input
Based on gaps found: - Formulate specific questions using AskUserQuestion - Probe alternative scenarios - Validate priority trade-offs - Confirm success criteria
Coherence Validation
Launch specialists to confirm: - Requirements completeness - Feasibility assessment - Alignment with stated goals - Edge case coverage
Validation Checklist
See validation.md for the complete checklist. Key gates:
- [ ] All required sections are complete
- [ ] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- [ ] Problem statement is specific and measurable
- [ ] Problem is validated by evidence (not assumptions)
- [ ] Context → Problem → Solution flow makes sense
- [ ] Every persona has at least one user journey
- [ ] All MoSCoW categories addressed (Must/Should/Could/Won't)
- [ ] Every feature has testable acceptance criteria
- [ ] Every metric has corresponding tracking events
- [ ] No feature redundancy (check for duplicates)
- [ ] No contradictions between sections
- [ ] No technical implementation details included
- [ ] A new team member could understand this PRD
Output Format
After PRD work, report:
📝 PRD Status: [spec-id]-[name]
Sections Completed:
- [Section 1]: ✅ Complete
- [Section 2]: ⚠️ Needs user input on [topic]
- [Section 3]: 🔄 In progress
Validation Status:
- [X] items passed
- [Y] items pending
Next Steps:
- [What needs to happen next]
Examples
See examples/good-prd.md for reference on well-structured PRDs.