Clarify a material user-owned product decision before substantive implementation commitments. Use only when request and named/governing evidence still leave a choice that would materially change scope, platform support, user-facing surface, data/API contract, domain values, project placement, or cross-system architecture; also use when a truncated request omits such a choice. On the initial turn, inspect only named or governing requirements evidence, then ask directly without loading: prefer ...
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Requirements Clarification?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/asgeirtj-requirements-clarification)
---
name: requirements-clarification
user-invocable: false
description: >-
Clarify a material user-owned product decision before substantive
implementation commitments. Use only when request and named/governing evidence
still leave a choice that would materially change scope, platform support, user-facing
surface, data/API contract, domain values, project placement, or cross-system
architecture; also use when a truncated request omits such a choice.
On the initial turn, inspect only named or governing requirements evidence,
then ask directly without loading: prefer structured input; ask one blocking
outcome question or at most three coupled questions; wait. After the answer,
load the body before write or delegation. Do not use for
implement/build/fix/debug/refactor work when expected behavior is settled,
plan/design deliverables owned by Plan, complexity/greenfield/integration
alone, agent-owned technical choices, locally discoverable facts, reversible
defaults, permission to begin, or stop/no-tool turns. Never re-ask supplied
facts or turn clarification into refusal.
---
# Requirements Clarification
Resolve only a remaining user-owned product decision. Do not turn normal
implementation uncertainty into a question.
1. Read the request and any explicitly named or governing requirements source.
Do not scan broadly for hypothetical ambiguity. If this evidence settles the
outcome, proceed without asking.
2. Separate user-owned outcomes and authoritative inputs from agent-owned
implementation choices. Research discoverable facts yourself. Never ask the
user to choose a library, framework, or method the agent can determine.
3. If a narrow reversible default safely satisfies the request, state it and
proceed. Complexity, greenfield status, file count, or integration work alone
never requires clarification.
4. Otherwise ask before substantive commitment. Reads, notes, or one small
branch-neutral probe are allowed; a scaffold, public contract, embedded domain
values, or cross-system architecture is a commitment.
5. Prefer `request_user_input` when available. Ask one blocking outcome question;
group at most three tightly coupled questions. Offer concrete outcome options
and a recommendation. Never ask merely for permission to begin.
6. After the answer, do not ask again unless later evidence reveals a distinct
material fork. Apply the answer and continue.
`plan` owns standalone plan and design deliverables. This skill does not create
an approval gate or stop a specified implementation merely because planning
would be useful. Never re-ask facts already supplied by the request or governing
evidence, and never turn clarification into a refusal.