Agent Skillsshinpr/claude-code-workflows › requirement-convergence

requirement-convergence

GitHub

在需求进入工作流前,将模糊或膨胀的需求收敛为明确的可观察结果、具体需求和非目标。通过结构化听证协议,保留用户原始措辞,评估就绪状态,确保构建范围清晰且无歧义。

dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/requirement-convergence/SKILL.md shinpr/claude-code-workflows

Trigger Scenarios

需求描述模糊、冗余或目标不明确 设计开始前需要明确构建范围和非目标

Install

npx skills add shinpr/claude-code-workflows --skill requirement-convergence -g -y
More Options

Non-standard path

npx skills add https://github.com/shinpr/claude-code-workflows/tree/main/dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/requirement-convergence -g -y

Use without installing

npx skills use shinpr/claude-code-workflows@requirement-convergence

指定 Agent (Claude Code)

npx skills add shinpr/claude-code-workflows --skill requirement-convergence -a claude-code -g -y

安装 repo 全部 skill

npx skills add shinpr/claude-code-workflows --all -g -y

预览 repo 内 skill

npx skills add shinpr/claude-code-workflows --list

SKILL.md

Frontmatter
{
    "name": "requirement-convergence",
    "description": "Separates the outcome a change must produce from the requirements proposed to reach it, records what the user excluded, and bands cost from structure. Use when a requirement enters a workflow, before design begins."
}

Requirement Convergence

Purpose

Requirements arrive bloated, ambiguous, or aimed at the wrong outcome. A capable model reconciles all three into a coherent plan and builds it faithfully — delivering exactly what was asked for when what was asked for was wrong.

This skill converges what to build. How to build it, and which documents the change requires, are settled after the what is.

Convergence Fields

Field Pass condition
outcome One observable result. A requirement that does not serve it is excess.
requirements[] Every build-relevant item labeled current-state or desired-future.
nonGoals[] Authored by the user, or the user stated there are none.
cost A band with the structural evidence that places it, plus the unknowns that remain.

cost is a rough band, not the effort estimate a work plan schedules against; requirements cannot support person-days. Its unknowns carry more decision weight than its size.

Classify from the user's own retained wording, not from an analyzer's restatement of it: wording that asks for an evaluation, describes a speculative idea, or suggests a mechanism stays in active convergence context as a judgment-only candidate. requirements[] and durable documents receive a candidate only after explicit user confirmation.

Each field carries a readiness label: ready, weak, or weak-but-explicit (weak, and the user agreed to leave it unresolved). Only the user sets weak-but-explicit. Requirements are converged when every applicable field is ready or weak-but-explicit.

Judgment rules per field: references/criteria.md.

Hearing Protocol

Run the hearing after scope analysis has produced the facts needed to judge the convergence fields. The workflow using this skill owns the interaction method and routing; this skill defines the hearing content and pass conditions.

Register these steps before starting and record each step's evidence as it completes:

Step Action Completion evidence
1 Render the Scope Confirmation below, asking only about the fields below ready Each fact cites the analysis output it came from, and User decisions holds one question per field below ready
2 Record each answer as that field's value The value uses wording the user supplied, not wording the hearing offered
3 Re-ask once when a recorded value still fails its pass condition, then mark the field weak-but-explicit when the user agrees to leave the second answer as it stands Two recorded answers, or the user's agreement to stop
4 Hand the record to the step that judges the fields An updated record returned from that step

Step 2's evidence is what keeps the hearing reviewable: a value restating the hearing's own candidates fails it, so the user's judgment survives however the question was put.

Scope Confirmation

Render this shape at every requirements confirmation stop, whether or not the hearing ran, using only what can change the user's requirement decision or the workflow route.

Section Contents
Confirmed scope The requirements and exclusions the user has already selected, in the user's wording
Decision evidence Each material observed fact with its source, followed by what that fact can change about scope, outcome, or cost
User decisions Each unresolved product, UX, or operational question, followed by the scope, outcome, or cost effects of its materially different answers
Workflow Rough cost band with the unknowns that remain, Structural Scale, and the selected document and workflow route

Keeping the first three sections separate is what makes the decision informable: merged, the reader cannot tell which line is the user's own settled boundary, which is a repository observation, and which is still open.

Only an explicit user answer moves an item from User decisions into Confirmed scope. Because Step 2 records the user's own wording, pose each open decision as a question and let the user supply its answer. The orchestrator owns Workflow and presents it as a selected route.

Storage Protocol

Carrier Holds Written by
The convergence record in the judging step's output Every field with its readiness label The judging step
PRD Success Criteria and Future / Out of Scope outcome; user-authored nonGoals The PRD production step
Design Doc Requirement Convergence The same when no PRD exists, and the fields left weak-but-explicit in every case The Design Doc production step

A flow that produces neither document carries the record in its own context to the next step.

Reference Protocol (For Downstream Consumers)

  1. Read the convergence record from the prompt.
  2. Treat nonGoals as excluded from the current change and desired-future requirements as buildable scope. Evaluation requests, speculative ideas, prescribed mechanisms, and agent-proposed capabilities that were not promoted create no downstream obligation; an accepted ADR may retain evaluated options as decision history.
  3. Treat a weak-but-explicit field as a recorded open question rather than a settled decision. When work depends on it, return the missing decision and its effect to the owning workflow.

Quality Checklist

  • Scope facts were presented before questions were asked
  • nonGoals came from the user, or the user stated there are none
  • Every applicable field is ready, or weak-but-explicit by the user's agreement

References

  • references/criteria.md — judgment rules per field, cost inputs, challenge intensity, solution-in-disguise test

Version History

  • d479be0 Current 2026-09-22 04:06

    重构了听证流程与范围确认结构,合并重复步骤以消除歧义;统一输出格式以区分已决策项与待决问题;优化分析器调用逻辑,直接保留用户原始措辞而非冗余分类。

  • 6426bba 2026-08-27 12:19

    更新requirements[]的标签条件,移除'speculative'并增加'current-state'和'desired-future';新增对评估请求、投机想法等作为仅判断候选者的处理规则。

  • 416af89 2026-08-12 16:39

    重构以对齐基于证据的模型自主性工作流程

  • 51b7dbc 2026-08-05 01:46

    添加基于证据的审查决议机制

  • 29b9210 2026-08-03 04:22

Same Skill Collection

dev-skills/skills/ai-development-guide/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/coding-principles/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/documentation-criteria/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/external-resource-context/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/frontend-ai-guide/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/implementation-approach/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/integration-e2e-testing/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/llm-friendly-context/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/requirement-convergence/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/test-implement/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/testing-principles/SKILL.md
dev-skills/skills/typescript-rules/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/ai-development-guide/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/coding-principles/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/documentation-criteria/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/external-resource-context/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/frontend-ai-guide/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/implementation-approach/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/integration-e2e-testing/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/llm-friendly-context/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-diagnose/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-front-adjust/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-front-build/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-front-design/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-front-plan/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-front-review/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-quality-profile/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-task/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/recipe-update-doc/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/requirement-convergence/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/subagents-orchestration-guide/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/task-analyzer/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/test-implement/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/testing-principles/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-frontend/skills/typescript-rules/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/ai-development-guide/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/coding-principles/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/documentation-criteria/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/external-resource-context/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/frontend-ai-guide/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/implementation-approach/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/integration-e2e-testing/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/llm-friendly-context/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-add-integration-tests/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-build/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-design/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-diagnose/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-front-adjust/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-front-build/SKILL.md
dev-workflows-fullstack/skills/recipe-front-design/SKILL.md

Metadata

Files
0
Version
d479be0
Hash
1ef34dc5
Indexed
2026-08-03 04:22

Accueil - Wiki
Copyright © 2011-2026 iteam. Current version is 2.155.2. UTC+08:00, 2026-09-22 05:03
浙ICP备14020137号-1