requirements-document — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited requirements-document (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Generates a Business Requirements Document (BRD) or Functional Requirements Specification (FRS) skeleton populated from the user's input. It structures requirements with unique IDs, priority, source, and acceptance notes — making them traceable and reviewable.
| BRD — Business Requirements Document | FRS — Functional Requirements Specification | |
|---|---|---|
| Audience | Business stakeholders, project sponsors | Solution architects, developers, testers |
| Focus | What the business needs and why | What the system must do |
| Language | Business language | Technical/functional language |
| Produced by | Business analyst | Functional/technical analyst |
| Input to | FRS, project charter | Design specs, test plans |
This skill produces both in a single document unless the user specifies one type only.
| Type | Description | Prefix |
|---|---|---|
| Business requirement | High-level business need or goal | BR- |
| Functional requirement | Specific system behaviour | FR- |
| Non-functional requirement | Quality attributes (performance, security, etc.) | NFR- |
| Constraint | Fixed boundary (budget, regulation, tech stack) | CON- |
| Assumption | Stated truth that has not been verified | ASM- |
Use MoSCoW: Must have / Should have / Could have / Won't have (this release).
write-epic or gap-analysis.stakeholder-map output if available, or list roles.# Requirements Document: [Project / System name]
| Field | Detail |
| --- | --- |
| **Version** | 0.1 — Draft |
| **Date** | YYYY-MM-DD |
| **Author** | [name] |
| **Status** | Draft / In review / Approved |
| **Approvers** | [names or roles] |
---
## 1. Business context
### 1.1 Problem statement
[What problem is being solved and for whom.]
### 1.2 Business objectives
1. [Objective 1]
2. [Objective 2]
### 1.3 Scope
**In scope:** [What this project / system covers]
**Out of scope:** [What is explicitly excluded]
---
## 2. Stakeholders
| Stakeholder | Role | Interest |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [Name / role] | [Team] | [What they need from this project] |
---
## 3. Business requirements
| ID | Requirement | Priority | Source |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| BR-001 | [The business need in business language] | Must have | [Stakeholder / regulation] |
---
## 4. Functional requirements
| ID | Requirement | Priority | Traces to | Notes |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| FR-001 | The system shall [behaviour] [condition] [threshold]. | Must have | BR-001 | [Clarification or constraint] |
| FR-002 | The system shall [behaviour]. | Should have | BR-001 | |
---
## 5. Non-functional requirements
| ID | Category | Requirement | Priority |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| NFR-001 | Performance | [The system shall respond to [action] within [N] seconds under [load].] | Must have |
| NFR-002 | Security | [The system shall [security behaviour].] | Must have |
| NFR-003 | Availability | [The system shall achieve [N]% uptime per [period].] | Should have |
---
## 6. Constraints
| ID | Constraint |
| --- | --- |
| CON-001 | [Fixed boundary — technology, budget, regulation, timeline] |
---
## 7. Assumptions
| ID | Assumption | Impact if false |
| --- | --- | --- |
| ASM-001 | [Stated truth not yet verified] | [What changes if this is wrong] |
---
## 8. Open issues
| ID | Issue | Owner | Due |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| OI-001 | [Unresolved requirement or missing information] | [Role] | [Date or TBD] |
---
## Appendix: Traceability matrix
| BR | FR(s) | Use case(s) | Test case(s) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| BR-001 | FR-001, FR-002 | UC-001 | TC-001, TC-002 |Input: "Write a BRD for a self-service customer portal where customers can view invoices, raise support tickets, and update their contact details."
Expected output: Business context with three objectives (reduce support calls, improve data accuracy, increase customer satisfaction). BR-001 to BR-003 per capability. FR-001 to FR-009 specifying system behaviours. NFRs covering session timeout (security), page load time (performance), and WCAG 2.1 AA (accessibility).
Input: User provides output from write-epic and gap-analysis.
Expected output: Requirements document where BRs map to epic goals, FRs address the gaps, and constraints come from the epic's out-of-scope section. Traceability matrix pre-populated.
use-case (FRs and use cases should be mutually traceable), acceptance-test-plan (FRs drive test cases), and gap-analysis (gaps become requirements).~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.