version: "1.0.1" name: requirements-elicitation description: Turns vague intent into testable requirements. tier: practical category: requirements created_by: human platforms: [windows, macos, linux] tags: [requirements, user-stories, acceptance-criteria, definition-of-ready, togaf] author: Andreas Wasita (@andreaswasita)

Requirements Elicitation

Turns vague intent into precise, testable, engineer-ready requirements. This is a technique skill — not a role. Both the TPM and Architect invoke it at different stages of the requirements pipeline.

Requirements are delivery contracts, not meeting minutes.

Every requirement must be testable, traceable, and unambiguous before it reaches engineering.

When to Use

• Starting a new feature, epic, or initiative
• Requirements feel vague, conflicting, or scope-creeping
• Someone asks "what does done look like?"
• Stakeholders keep changing their minds mid-sprint
• Writing PRDs, feature briefs, or story backlogs
• Assessing system impact of incoming requirements (Architect stage)
• Translating user stories into system specifications (Architect stage)

Prerequisites

• The ask_user Copilot tool to gather clarifications without spamming prose.
• The edit Copilot tool to write the resulting brief / story cards.
• A target file for the artefacts (typically requirements/<engagement>/stories.md or docs/feature-brief.md).
• Access to the primary stakeholder — no requirements loop with a phantom user.
• For the Architect stage: read access to the TPM-produced brief.

How to Run

1. DISCOVER   — Ask 3–5 problem-framing questions; never accept solutions-disguised-as-requirements.
2. INTERROGATE — Drive Socratic questions across scope, edges, success, failure, dependencies, constraints.
3. STRUCTURE  — Write user stories + Given/When/Then acceptance criteria + assumptions + out-of-scope.
4. VALIDATE   — Read each AC back in plain language and capture written sign-off.
5. GATE       — Walk the Definition of Ready checklist. If anything fails, return to step 2.
6. HAND OFF   — TPM passes to Architect; Architect may return stories that are not technically achievable.

Quick Reference

Procedure

Step 1: DISCOVER — Understand the problem, not the solution

• Ask: What problem are we solving? Who has it? What happens if we don't solve it?
• Identify the primary stakeholder, affected users, and business driver.
• Never accept "we need a button that does X" — trace back to the why.

Step 2: INTERROGATE — Socratic elicitation

Use structured questions to surface hidden requirements:

• Scope: What is explicitly NOT included?
• Edge cases: What happens when [exception scenario]?
• Success: How do we measure that this worked?
• Failure: What does failure look like? Who notices?
• Dependencies: What must exist before this can work?
• Constraints: Time, budget, compliance, technical?

Step 3: STRUCTURE — Write requirements in standard form

User Story format (mandatory):

As a [specific user role],
I want to [action],
So that [measurable outcome].

Acceptance Criteria format (mandatory, minimum 3 per story):

Given [precondition],
When [action],
Then [expected result].

Additional artefacts:

• Functional Requirements — numbered, atomic, testable
• Non-Functional Requirements — performance, security, accessibility thresholds (numeric, not adjectives)
• Assumptions — explicit, dated, owner-assigned
• Out of Scope — written as a boundary list, not implied

Step 4: VALIDATE — Confirm before proceeding

• Read back each acceptance criterion in plain language.
• Get explicit sign-off (written, not verbal).
• Log open questions with owners and due dates.

Step 5: GATE — Definition of Ready checklist

See Verification below. If any gate fails → return to INTERROGATE. Do not proceed.

Output Templates

Feature Brief (one-pager):

## Feature: [Name]
**Business Objective:** [Measurable outcome]
**Primary User:** [Specific role]
**Problem Statement:** [What breaks without this?]
**In Scope:** [Explicit list]
**Out of Scope:** [Explicit list]
**Success Metric:** [Threshold + measurement method]
**Target Sprint / Date:** [Committed delivery window]

Story Card:

## Story: [ID] [Title]
**As a** [role], **I want to** [action], **so that** [outcome].
 
**Acceptance Criteria:**
-Given [X], when [Y], then [Z].
-Given [X], when [Y], then [Z].
-Given [X], when [Y], then [Z].
 
**Edge Cases:** [List]
**Out of Scope:** [List]
**Dependencies:** [List]
**Definition of Done:** [List]

Two-Agent Contract

This skill is invoked at two stages of the requirements pipeline:

The bidirectional gate between TPM and Architect is what prevents bad requirements from silently becoming bad code.

Worked Examples

Bad story (fails gate):

As a user, I want the page to load fast so it's a good experience.

Problems: "user" is unspecific, "fast" is unmeasurable, "good experience" is subjective.

Good story (passes gate):

As a retail customer on mobile, I want the product listing page to render within 2 seconds on 3G, so that I can browse without abandoning the session.

• Given I am on a 3G connection, when I open the product listing, then the first meaningful paint occurs within 2 seconds.
• Given the listing has 500+ products, when I scroll past the first page, then the next batch loads within 1 second via infinite scroll.
• Given the API returns an error, when I open the product listing, then I see a retry prompt within 500ms — not a blank page.

Pitfalls

• Transcribing stakeholder monologues and calling it requirements.
• Writing "the system shall…" without specifying who, what, and when.
• Accepting "we'll figure out the edge cases in dev."
• Letting "fast" or "user-friendly" survive into engineering without a threshold.
• Skipping sign-off because "everyone was in the room."
• Writing 40 stories before validating the first 5.
• Treating scope as flexible once sprint planning begins.
• Letting the Architect silently absorb feasibility risk instead of returning stories to the TPM.

Verification

Requirements MUST pass all gates before handoff:

• [ ] Business objective is stated and measurable.
• [ ] User role is specific (not "the user" or "admin").
• [ ] Minimum 3 Given/When/Then acceptance criteria, each independently testable.
• [ ] Edge cases documented (minimum 2 per story).
• [ ] Out-of-scope explicitly listed — not implied.
• [ ] All ambiguous language eliminated ("fast" → threshold, "easy" → step count, "intuitive" → measurable heuristic).
• [ ] Non-functional requirements have numeric thresholds.
• [ ] Assumptions recorded with owners and expiry dates.
• [ ] Dependencies identified.
• [ ] Written stakeholder sign-off obtained.
• [ ] Architect impact assessment captured (or stories returned to TPM with reason).