requirements-clarity-scoring
When gathering requirements during discovery phase to measure answer quality and decide when to proceed.
When & Why to Use This Skill
The Requirements Clarity Scoring skill provides a systematic framework for assessing the quality and completeness of project requirements during the discovery phase. By utilizing a 1-5 scoring rubric and weighted evaluation criteria based on IEEE standards, it enables teams to quantify clarity, identify critical information gaps, and make objective, data-driven decisions on whether to proceed with project execution or seek further clarification.
Use Cases
- Discovery Phase Evaluation: Quantitatively assess the clarity of stakeholder requirements to ensure a solid foundation before moving into the design or development stages.
- Risk Mitigation: Identify high-risk areas where ambiguous requirements (scores < 3.0) could lead to project delays, budget overruns, or technical debt.
- Stakeholder Communication: Provide objective justification for additional discovery sessions by presenting a weighted average score that highlights specific gaps in problem definition or success criteria.
- Standardized Requirement Benchmarking: Implement a consistent quality gate across multiple projects to ensure all technical and business constraints meet a minimum clarity threshold before kickoff.
| name | requirements-clarity-scoring |
|---|---|
| description | When gathering requirements during discovery phase to measure answer quality and decide when to proceed. |
| version | 1.1.0 |
| tokens | ~350 |
| confidence | high |
| - https | //www.reqview.com/doc/iso-iec-ieee-29148-templates/ |
| last_validated | 2025-12-10 |
| next_review | 2025-12-24 |
| tags | [requirements, discovery, clarity, planning] |
When to Use
When gathering requirements during discovery phase to measure answer quality and decide when to proceed.
Patterns
Clarity Scoring (1-5)
5 = CRYSTAL CLEAR
- Specific, measurable answer
- No ambiguity
- Actionable immediately
Example: "Response time must be <200ms at p95"
4 = CLEAR
- Mostly specific
- Minor gaps fillable
Example: "Response should be fast" + "under 500ms is acceptable"
3 = PARTIAL
- General direction known
- Needs follow-up questions
Example: "Performance matters" (how much? which operations?)
2 = VAGUE
- Conflicting information
- Multiple interpretations possible
Example: "It should just work" (what does 'work' mean?)
1 = UNCLEAR
- No answer or "I don't know"
- Requires stakeholder escalation
Example: "We haven't decided yet"
Proceed Threshold
Calculate average score across all answers:
≥ 4.0 → PROCEED to next phase
3.5-4.0 → PROCEED with noted risks
3.0-3.5 → CLARIFY critical gaps first
< 3.0 → STOP - too many unknowns
Question Categories to Score
1. Problem Definition (weight: HIGH)
2. Success Criteria (weight: HIGH)
3. Scope Boundaries (weight: HIGH)
4. Technical Constraints (weight: MEDIUM)
5. Timeline/Budget (weight: MEDIUM)
6. Nice-to-haves (weight: LOW)
Anti-Patterns
- Proceeding with average < 3.0
- Ignoring LOW scores on HIGH weight items
- Assuming unstated requirements
- Not documenting score justification
Verification Checklist
- All questions scored 1-5
- Weighted average calculated
- HIGH weight items all ≥ 3
- Gaps documented with follow-up plan