Skip to content
Back to skills

Requirements Validator

ASecurity

Validates PRD, user stories, or feature requirements against SMART criteria. Use when reviewing requirements to catch vagueness before it causes expensive rework.

  • 85 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added May 28, 2026
ai-agentsgoperformance

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned May 28, 2026

npx -y skills add ash1794/vibe-engineering --skill vibe-requirements-validator --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Requirements Validator?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Requirements Validator
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/ash1794-requirements-validator/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/ash1794-requirements-validator)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: vibe-requirements-validator
description: Validates PRD, user stories, or feature requirements against SMART criteria. Use when reviewing requirements to catch vagueness before it causes expensive rework.
user-invocable: true
---

# vibe-requirements-validator

Vague requirements cause expensive rework. Catch them early.

## When to Use This Skill

- Reviewing a PRD or feature spec before implementation
- Writing acceptance criteria for user stories
- When you notice requirements like "make it fast" or "improve UX"
- Before estimating effort for a feature

## When NOT to Use This Skill

- Internal technical tasks with clear scope
- Bug fixes (the bug IS the requirement)
- When requirements are already validated and approved

## SMART Criteria

Score each requirement 1-5 on:

- **S**pecific — Is it clear what exactly needs to be built? (Not "improve performance" but "reduce P95 latency to <200ms")
- **M**easurable — Can you objectively verify it's done? (Not "users like it" but "NPS score >40")
- **A**chievable — Can it be built with available resources and constraints?
- **R**elevant — Does it align with project goals and user needs?
- **T**ime-bound — Is there a clear scope boundary? (Not "eventually" but "in v1.0")

## Steps

1. **List all requirements** from the document
2. **Score each** on SMART (1-5 per dimension)
3. **Flag issues**:
   - Score < 3 on any dimension → needs revision
   - Measurability < 3 → most common failure, flag prominently
   - Near-duplicates → consolidate
   - Positioning statements masquerading as requirements → remove

4. **Report**:

## Output Format

### Requirements Validation: [Document Name]

**Total Requirements**: X
**Passing (avg >= 3.5)**: Y (Z%)
**Flagged**: W

| ID | Requirement | S | M | A | R | T | Avg | Issue |
|----|------------|---|---|---|---|---|-----|-------|
| FR-1 | "..." | 4 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3.6 | Low measurability |

### Top Issues
1. **Measurability crisis** — X requirements have M < 3
2. **Near-duplicates** — [list pairs]
3. **Not requirements** — [positioning statements]

### Recommended Revisions
| ID | Current | Suggested |
|----|---------|-----------|
| FR-3 | "Improve load time" | "Reduce initial page load to <2s on 3G" |

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.