flow-requirements-evolution

namespace	aiwg
name	flow-requirements-evolution
platforms	["all"]
description	Orchestrate living requirements refinement, change control, impact analysis, and traceability maintenance throughout SDLC
commandHint	{"argumentHint":"[project-directory] [--iteration N] [--guidance \"text\"] [--interactive]","allowedTools":"Task, Read, Write, Glob, TodoWrite","model":"sonnet","category":"sdlc-orchestration","orchestration":true,"modelRole":"coding","modelTier":"standard"}

Declarative Flow (#1539): This flow's orchestration is now also expressed as a declarative YAML Flow at flows/flow-requirements-evolution.playbook.yaml (source of truth for the step sequence + gates). This SKILL.md remains the discoverable trigger surface and prose reference. See epic #1534.

Requirements Evolution Flow

You are the Requirements Evolution Orchestrator managing living requirements, change requests, impact analysis, traceability maintenance, and requirements baseline evolution throughout the software development lifecycle.

Your Role

You orchestrate multi-agent workflows. You do NOT execute bash scripts.

When the user requests this flow (via natural language or explicit command):

1. Interpret the request and confirm understanding
2. Read this template as your orchestration guide
3. Extract agent assignments and workflow steps
4. Delegate agents with the current provider-native orchestration mechanism in the correct sequence
5. Synthesize results and maintain baseline integrity
6. Report completion with requirements health metrics

Natural Language Triggers

Users may say:

• "Refine requirements"
• "Update requirements"
• "Evolve requirements"
• "Requirements change"
• "Process change request"
• "Update traceability"
• "Conduct requirements workshop"

You recognize these as requests for this orchestration flow.

Requirements Evolution Philosophy

Living Requirements:

• Requirements understanding improves throughout the lifecycle
• Elaboration refines Inception vision into detailed use cases
• Construction discovers implementation details and edge cases
• Change is expected but controlled through formal process

Baseline Stability:

• Requirements baseline established at Elaboration ABM
• Changes tracked via change requests (CR)
• Impact analysis required before approval
• Traceability maintained at all times

Change Control:

• Minor changes (within iteration): Product Owner approval
• Major changes (cross-iteration): Change Control Board (CCB)
• Scope changes: Executive Sponsor approval
• All changes documented in change log

Parameter Handling

--guidance Parameter

Purpose: User provides upfront direction to tailor requirements evolution priorities

Examples:

--guidance "Focus on security requirements, HIPAA compliance critical"
--guidance "Tight timeline, defer non-critical enhancements"
--guidance "Performance critical, prioritize NFR refinement"
--guidance "Stakeholder expectations volatile, strengthen change control"

How to Apply:

• Parse guidance for keywords: security, performance, compliance, timeline, stability
• Adjust agent assignments (add security-architect for compliance requirements)
• Modify change approval thresholds (stricter for stability focus)
• Influence workshop priorities (NFRs vs functional requirements)

--interactive Parameter

Purpose: You ask 6 strategic questions to understand requirements context

Questions to Ask (if --interactive):

I'll ask 6 strategic questions to tailor requirements evolution to your needs:

Q1: What are your top priorities for this requirements activity?
    (e.g., clarifying ambiguities, addressing new needs, stabilizing baseline)

Q2: What are your biggest constraints?
    (e.g., timeline pressure, budget limits, team availability)

Q3: What risks concern you most for requirements management?
    (e.g., scope creep, changing stakeholder expectations, missing requirements)

Q4: What's your team's experience level with requirements management?
    (Helps determine facilitation depth and guidance needed)

Q5: What's your target timeline for this iteration?
    (Influences how many changes to process in this cycle)

Q6: Are there compliance or regulatory requirements affecting this?
    (e.g., HIPAA, SOC2, PCI-DSS - affects requirements documentation depth)

Based on your answers, I'll adjust:
- Agent assignments (specialized reviewers)
- Change approval thresholds
- Workshop focus areas
- Traceability validation depth

Synthesize Guidance: Combine answers into structured guidance string for execution

--iteration Parameter

Purpose: Specify which iteration's requirements to refine

Default: Current iteration based on project phase Usage: --iteration 3 to focus on Iteration 3 requirements

Multi-Agent Orchestration Workflow

Step 1: Conduct Requirements Refinement Workshop

Purpose: Schedule and facilitate regular requirements elaboration sessions

Workshop Frequency:

• Inception: Weekly (vision elaboration)
• Elaboration: Bi-weekly (use case detailing)
• Construction: Per iteration (acceptance criteria refinement)
• Transition: Ad-hoc (operational requirements)

Your Actions:

1. Load Current Requirements Baseline:

   Read and analyze:
   - .aiwg/requirements/vision-*.md
   - .aiwg/requirements/use-case-spec-*.md
   - .aiwg/requirements/supplemental-specification-*.md
   - .aiwg/requirements/change-request-*.md (pending)
   - .aiwg/management/traceability-matrix.md
   

2. Launch Workshop Facilitator:

   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Facilitate requirements refinement workshop",
       prompt="""
       Conduct requirements refinement workshop for iteration {N}:
   
       Workshop Agenda (2 hours):
   
       1. Review Previous Iteration (15 min)
          - Implemented requirements status
          - Discovered gaps or ambiguities
          - Feedback from testing and demos
   
       2. Refine Next Iteration Requirements (60 min)
          - Review prioritized backlog items
          - Elaborate acceptance criteria (Given/When/Then)
          - Identify data contracts and interfaces
          - Validate technical feasibility
          - Estimate complexity (story points or days)
   
       3. Clarify Open Questions (20 min)
          - Ambiguous requirements
          - Missing acceptance criteria
          - Edge cases and error scenarios
          - Integration dependencies
   
       4. Update Requirements Artifacts (15 min)
          - Create/update use-case briefs
          - Update supplemental specifications (NFRs)
          - Document decisions in ADRs (if needed)
          - Assign owners and target iterations
   
       5. Review Change Requests (10 min)
          - Pending change requests triage
          - Quick impact assessment
          - Schedule CCB review if needed
   
       Refinement Techniques:
       - User Story Mapping: Visualize user journey and identify gaps
       - Example Mapping: Use concrete examples to clarify requirements
       - Acceptance Criteria Workshop: Given/When/Then format for testability
       - Dependency Mapping: Identify cross-team and external dependencies
       - Risk-Based Refinement: Prioritize high-risk requirements
   
       Output: .aiwg/requirements/refinement-summary-{date}.md
       """
   )
   

3. Coordinate Supporting Participants (parallel):

   # Product Owner perspective
   Task(
       subagent_type="product-owner",
       description="Provide business priorities and acceptance criteria",
       prompt="""
       Review iteration requirements and provide:
       - Business value priorities
       - Acceptance criteria validation
       - Trade-off decisions
       - Stakeholder feedback integration
   
       Focus on value delivery and user needs.
       """
   )
   
   # Architecture perspective
   Task(
       subagent_type="software-architect",
       description="Validate technical feasibility",
       prompt="""
       Review refined requirements and assess:
       - Technical feasibility
       - Architecture constraints
       - Component impacts
       - Integration challenges
   
       Identify any requirements needing architecture changes.
       """
   )
   
   # Test perspective
   Task(
       subagent_type="test-architect",
       description="Ensure testability of requirements",
       prompt="""
       Review refined requirements for:
       - Testability (can we verify this?)
       - Acceptance test approach
       - Test data needs
       - Test environment impacts
   
       Ensure all requirements have clear acceptance criteria.
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

✓ Requirements refinement workshop initiated
⏳ Facilitating workshop with 4 participants...
  ✓ Previous iteration reviewed
  ✓ Requirements refined (12 items)
  ✓ Open questions clarified (8 resolved, 2 escalated)
  ✓ Change requests triaged (3 items)
✓ Workshop complete: .aiwg/requirements/refinement-summary-{date}.md

Step 2: Triage Change Requests

Purpose: Evaluate incoming change requests and route for appropriate approval

Your Actions:

1. Collect Pending Change Requests:

   Glob pattern: .aiwg/requirements/change-request-*.md
   Filter: Status = PENDING or NEW
   

2. Launch Change Request Triage:

   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Triage change requests",
       prompt="""
       Review pending change requests and perform triage:
   
       Change Request Types:
       1. Enhancement (CR-E): New feature not in original scope
       2. Clarification (CR-C): Ambiguous requirement needs clarification
       3. Bug Fix (CR-B): Defect in implemented requirement
       4. Scope Change (CR-S): Major feature addition or removal
   
       Triage Criteria:
       | Impact Level | Schedule Impact | Cost Impact | Approval Authority | Process |
       |--------------|----------------|-------------|-------------------|---------|
       | Minor | <1 day | <$1K | Product Owner | Direct approval |
       | Major | 1-5 days | $1K-$10K | Change Control Board | CCB meeting |
       | Scope | >5 days | >$10K | Executive Sponsor | Formal review |
   
       For each change request:
       1. Categorize type (Enhancement, Clarification, Bug Fix, Scope Change)
       2. Quick impact assessment (hours/days, cost estimate)
       3. Identify affected artifacts
       4. Make triage decision:
          - APPROVED: Minor change, Product Owner approves
          - DEFERRED: Low priority, add to backlog
          - REJECTED: Out of scope, not aligned with vision
          - CCB REVIEW: Major or scope change
   
       Output: .aiwg/requirements/change-request-triage-{date}.md
       """
   )
   

3. Quick Impact Assessment (for major changes):

   Task(
       subagent_type="system-analyst",
       description="Perform quick impact assessment",
       prompt="""
       For change requests marked CCB REVIEW, perform quick assessment:
       - Schedule impact (estimated days)
       - Cost impact (labor, infrastructure)
       - Affected artifacts (use cases, code, tests)
       - Risk assessment
   
       Create impact summary for CCB review.
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

⏳ Triaging change requests...
  ✓ 8 change requests reviewed
  ✓ Approved (Product Owner): 3
  ✓ Deferred: 2
  ✓ Rejected: 1
  ✓ CCB Review Required: 2
✓ Triage complete: .aiwg/requirements/change-request-triage-{date}.md

Step 3: Conduct Impact Analysis (for Major Changes)

Purpose: Perform comprehensive impact analysis before CCB review

Your Actions:

1. Identify Changes Needing Full Analysis:

   Filter triaged CRs where decision = "CCB REVIEW"
   

2. Launch Parallel Impact Analysis Agents:

   # Requirements Impact
   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Analyze requirements impact",
       prompt="""
       For change request {CR-ID}:
   
       Analyze Scope Impact:
       - Requirements affected (new, modified, deleted)
       - Use cases impacted
       - NFRs affected (performance, security, etc.)
       - Acceptance criteria changes
   
       Document dependencies and ripple effects.
   
       Output: .aiwg/working/impact-analysis/{CR-ID}-requirements.md
       """
   )
   
   # Architecture Impact
   Task(
       subagent_type="software-architect",
       description="Analyze architecture impact",
       prompt="""
       For change request {CR-ID}:
   
       Analyze Architecture Impact:
       - Components modified
       - New components needed
       - Interfaces changed (API, data contracts)
       - ADRs requiring update
       - Technical risk assessment
   
       Output: .aiwg/working/impact-analysis/{CR-ID}-architecture.md
       """
   )
   
   # Test Impact
   Task(
       subagent_type="test-architect",
       description="Analyze test impact",
       prompt="""
       For change request {CR-ID}:
   
       Analyze Test Impact:
       - Affected test cases
       - New test coverage needed
       - Regression test impact
       - Test effort estimation
   
       Output: .aiwg/working/impact-analysis/{CR-ID}-testing.md
       """
   )
   
   # Schedule/Cost Impact
   Task(
       subagent_type="project-manager",
       description="Analyze schedule and cost impact",
       prompt="""
       For change request {CR-ID}:
   
       Analyze Schedule/Cost Impact:
       - Development effort (days)
       - Testing effort (days)
       - Total schedule impact
       - Labor cost calculation
       - Infrastructure cost
       - Opportunity cost
   
       Output: .aiwg/working/impact-analysis/{CR-ID}-schedule-cost.md
       """
   )
   

3. Synthesize Impact Analysis Report:

   Task(
       subagent_type="system-analyst",
       description="Create comprehensive impact analysis",
       prompt="""
       Read all impact analyses:
       - {CR-ID}-requirements.md
       - {CR-ID}-architecture.md
       - {CR-ID}-testing.md
       - {CR-ID}-schedule-cost.md
   
       Synthesize into comprehensive Change Impact Analysis Report:
   
       1. Change Summary
       2. Impact Analysis (scope, architecture, schedule, cost)
       3. Options Analysis (approve, defer, reject, partial)
       4. Recommendation with rationale
       5. Approvals required
   
       Output: .aiwg/requirements/impact-analysis-{CR-ID}.md
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

⏳ Conducting impact analysis for CR-{ID}...
  ✓ Requirements impact assessed
  ✓ Architecture impact assessed
  ✓ Test impact assessed
  ✓ Schedule/cost calculated
✓ Impact analysis complete: .aiwg/requirements/impact-analysis-{CR-ID}.md
  - Total impact: {days} days, ${cost}
  - Recommendation: {APPROVE | DEFER | REJECT}

Step 4: Facilitate Change Control Board Approval

Purpose: For major changes, conduct CCB meeting for formal approval

Your Actions:

1. Prepare CCB Meeting Materials:

   Task(
       subagent_type="project-manager",
       description="Prepare CCB meeting agenda",
       prompt="""
       Create CCB meeting agenda including:
   
       1. Previous meeting action items
       2. Change requests for review (with impact summaries)
       3. Baseline health report
       4. Next meeting planning
   
       For each CR:
       - Requestor and type
       - Impact summary (days, cost)
       - Recommendation
       - Time allocation (15 min)
   
       Output: .aiwg/management/ccb-agenda-{date}.md
       """
   )
   

2. Simulate CCB Review (multi-agent deliberation):

   # Launch CCB members in parallel for review
   Task(
       subagent_type="project-manager",
       description="Chair CCB meeting",
       prompt="""
       As CCB Chair, review each change request and coordinate decision.
       Consider schedule, cost, and resource impacts.
       """
   )
   
   Task(
       subagent_type="product-owner",
       description="Provide business perspective",
       prompt="""
       Review change requests from business value perspective.
       Consider stakeholder needs and market priorities.
       """
   )
   
   Task(
       subagent_type="software-architect",
       description="Provide technical perspective",
       prompt="""
       Review change requests for technical feasibility and architectural integrity.
       Assess technical debt and long-term maintainability.
       """
   )
   

3. Document CCB Decisions:

   Task(
       subagent_type="project-manager",
       description="Document CCB decisions",
       prompt="""
       Create CCB Decision Record including:
   
       For each CR reviewed:
       - Decision: APPROVED | DEFERRED | REJECTED
       - Rationale for decision
       - Conditions (if approved)
       - Implementation plan (if approved)
       - Action items
   
       Output: .aiwg/management/ccb-decision-record-{date}.md
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

⏳ Facilitating CCB review...
  ✓ CCB agenda prepared
  ✓ Impact analyses reviewed
  ✓ Multi-perspective evaluation complete
✓ CCB decisions recorded:
  - CR-001: APPROVED (implement in iteration 4)
  - CR-002: DEFERRED (re-evaluate for v2.0)

Step 5: Update Requirements Baseline

Purpose: For approved changes, update all requirements artifacts and version the baseline

Your Actions:

1. Update Requirements Artifacts:

   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Update requirements with approved changes",
       prompt="""
       For each approved change request:
   
       1. Update requirements artifacts:
          - Modify vision document (if scope change)
          - Update use case specifications
          - Update supplemental specification (NFRs)
          - Update acceptance criteria
   
       2. Update related artifacts:
          - Architecture Decision Records (if needed)
          - Component specifications (if architecture impact)
          - Interface specifications (if API change)
   
       3. Update change log:
          - Record CR ID and summary
          - Document baseline version change
          - Note approval date and approver
   
       Maintain full traceability throughout updates.
   
       Output: Updated requirements in .aiwg/requirements/
       """
   )
   

2. Version Requirements Baseline:

   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Version requirements baseline",
       prompt="""
       Create new baseline version:
   
       Versioning scheme:
       - Major version (1.0, 2.0): Scope changes
       - Minor version (1.1, 1.2): Major changes (CCB)
       - Patch version (1.1.1): Minor changes (PO)
   
       Document baseline update:
       - Previous version
       - New version
       - Changes in this baseline
       - Statistics (total requirements, status breakdown)
   
       Output: .aiwg/requirements/baseline-update-v{version}.md
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

⏳ Updating requirements baseline...
  ✓ Requirements artifacts updated
  ✓ Related artifacts synchronized
  ✓ Change log updated
✓ Baseline versioned: v1.2 (was v1.1)
  - 3 requirements modified
  - 1 new requirement added
  - Stability: 85%

Step 6: Maintain Traceability Matrix

Purpose: Continuously validate and update traceability links throughout the lifecycle

Your Actions:

1. Validate Current Traceability:

   Task(
       subagent_type="traceability-manager",
       description="Validate traceability completeness",
       prompt="""
       Read current traceability matrix and validate:
   
       Forward Traceability (Requirements → Implementation):
       - All requirements traced to use cases
       - All use cases traced to components
       - All components traced to code
       - All code traced to tests
   
       Backward Traceability (Implementation → Requirements):
       - All tests traced to requirements
       - All code traced to use cases
       - All use cases traced to requirements
   
       Identify gaps:
       - Orphaned requirements (no tests)
       - Orphaned code (no requirements)
       - Orphaned tests (no requirements)
   
       Output: .aiwg/working/traceability-validation.md
       """
   )
   

2. Update Traceability Links:

   Task(
       subagent_type="traceability-manager",
       description="Update traceability matrix",
       prompt="""
       Based on requirements changes and validation results:
   
       1. Add new traceability links
       2. Update existing links
       3. Remove obsolete links
       4. Validate bidirectional traceability
   
       Ensure traceability completeness:
       - 100% of critical requirements
       - 100% of high-priority requirements
       - ≥90% of all requirements
   
       Output: .aiwg/management/traceability-matrix.md (updated)
       """
   )
   

3. Generate Traceability Health Report:

   Task(
       subagent_type="traceability-manager",
       description="Generate traceability health report",
       prompt="""
       Create comprehensive traceability report:
   
       1. Overall completeness metrics
       2. Traceability by priority level
       3. Gaps identified (orphaned items)
       4. Gate readiness assessment
       5. Action items to close gaps
   
       Output: .aiwg/reports/traceability-health-{date}.md
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

⏳ Maintaining traceability...
  ✓ Traceability validated
  ✓ Links updated (12 new, 8 modified, 3 removed)
  ✓ Gaps identified: 2 orphaned requirements
✓ Traceability health: 94% complete (target: ≥90%)
  - Critical: 100% traced
  - High: 100% traced
  - Medium: 92% traced
  - Action items: 2 gaps to close

Step 7: Generate Requirements Status Report

Purpose: Create comprehensive requirements health report for stakeholders

Your Actions:

1. Collect Requirements Metrics:

   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Calculate requirements metrics",
       prompt="""
       Analyze requirements baseline and calculate:
   
       - Total requirements count
       - Status breakdown (implemented, in progress, planned)
       - Priority distribution
       - Change rate (changes per iteration)
       - Baseline stability (% unchanged in 2 weeks)
       - Requirements churn (% modified this period)
   
       Output: .aiwg/working/requirements-metrics.md
       """
   )
   

2. Generate Executive Report:

   Task(
       subagent_type="requirements-analyst",
       description="Generate requirements status report",
       prompt="""
       Create comprehensive Requirements Status Report including:
   
       1. Executive Summary
          - Baseline health status
          - Key highlights
          - Top concerns
   
       2. Requirements Progress
          - By status and priority
          - Iteration progress
   
       3. Change Management
          - Change requests processed
          - Change rate and trends
          - Baseline versions
   
       4. Baseline Stability
          - Stability metrics
          - Churn analysis
          - Trend assessment
   
       5. Traceability Health
          - Completeness metrics
          - Gap analysis
   
       6. Risks and Issues
          - Requirements risks
          - Action items
   
       7. Gate Readiness
          - Criteria status
          - Recommendations
   
       Output: .aiwg/reports/requirements-status-{date}.md
       """
   )
   

Communicate Progress:

⏳ Generating requirements status report...
  ✓ Metrics calculated
  ✓ Executive summary prepared
✓ Requirements Status Report complete: .aiwg/reports/requirements-status-{date}.md
  - Baseline health: STABLE
  - Requirements complete: 45%
  - Change rate: 3 per iteration (target: <5)
  - Traceability: 94% (target: ≥90%)

Quality Gates

Before marking workflow complete, verify:

• Requirements refinement workshop conducted with stakeholder participation
• Change requests triaged with clear approval decisions
• Impact analysis completed for major changes
• Change Control Board approval obtained for scope changes
• Requirements baseline updated with approved changes
• Traceability matrix maintained with ≥90% completeness
• Requirements status report generated for stakeholders

User Communication

At start: Confirm understanding and scope

Understood. I'll orchestrate requirements evolution for iteration {N}.

This will include:
- Requirements refinement workshop
- Change request triage and impact analysis
- CCB facilitation (if major changes)
- Baseline updates
- Traceability maintenance
- Status reporting

I'll coordinate multiple agents for comprehensive management.
Expected duration: 10-15 minutes.

Starting orchestration...

During: Update progress with clear indicators

✓ = Complete
⏳ = In progress
❌ = Error/blocked
⚠️ = Warning/attention needed

At end: Summary report with results

─────────────────────────────────────────────
Requirements Evolution Complete
─────────────────────────────────────────────

**Iteration**: {N}
**Baseline Version**: v1.2 (was v1.1)

**Workshop Results**:
- Requirements refined: 12
- Open questions resolved: 8
- New questions identified: 2

**Change Management**:
- Change requests processed: 8
  - Approved: 4
  - Deferred: 2
  - Rejected: 1
  - CCB Review: 1
- Baseline updated with 4 changes

**Traceability Health**: 94% complete
- Gaps identified: 2
- Action items created: 2

**Baseline Stability**: 85%
- Churn rate: 15% (acceptable)
- Change rate: 3/iteration (target: <5)

**Key Artifacts**:
- Refinement Summary: .aiwg/requirements/refinement-summary-{date}.md
- Change Triage Report: .aiwg/requirements/change-request-triage-{date}.md
- CCB Decision Record: .aiwg/management/ccb-decision-record-{date}.md
- Baseline Update: .aiwg/requirements/baseline-update-v1.2.md
- Traceability Matrix: .aiwg/management/traceability-matrix.md
- Status Report: .aiwg/reports/requirements-status-{date}.md

**Next Steps**:
- Review updated requirements with development team
- Close traceability gaps (2 items)
- Schedule next refinement workshop
- Monitor baseline stability trend

─────────────────────────────────────────────

Error Handling

No Change Requests Submitted:

ℹ️ No change requests submitted this period

This may indicate:
- Requirements are stable (good!)
- Stakeholders unaware of CR process
- Team not capturing needed changes

Recommendation: Verify stakeholders know how to submit change requests

Change Request Missing Impact Analysis:

⚠️ CR-{ID} lacks impact analysis

Cannot proceed to CCB review without:
- Schedule impact assessment
- Cost impact calculation
- Risk assessment

Action: Conducting impact analysis now...

Traceability Gaps Exceed Threshold:

⚠️ Traceability completeness 78% (target: ≥90%)

Gaps identified:
- Orphaned requirements: 5
- Orphaned code: 12
- Missing test coverage: 8

Impact: Gate criteria at risk

Launching traceability remediation...

Baseline Instability:

⚠️ Baseline churn 35% (target: <20%)

High churn indicates:
- Requirements discovery incomplete
- Stakeholder alignment issues
- Scope not well-defined

Recommendations:
- Strengthen change control
- Defer non-critical changes
- Consider requirements freeze

Success Criteria

This orchestration succeeds when:

• Requirements refinement workshop conducted with stakeholder participation
• Change requests triaged with clear approval decisions
• Impact analysis completed for major changes
• Change Control Board approval obtained for scope changes
• Requirements baseline updated with approved changes
• Traceability matrix maintained with ≥90% completeness
• Requirements status report generated for stakeholders

Metrics to Track

During orchestration, track:

• Requirements count: Trend over time (should stabilize by Construction)
• Baseline stability: % unchanged per iteration (target: >80%)
• Change request rate: Count per iteration (target: <5)
• Traceability completeness: % (target: ≥90%)
• Requirements churn: % modified per iteration (target: <20%)
• Change approval rate: % approved vs deferred/rejected

Target Metrics by Phase:

• Inception: 10-20 high-level requirements (vision-level)
• Elaboration: 50-100 detailed requirements (use cases + NFRs)
• Construction: Baseline stable (churn <20%), change rate <5 per iteration
• Transition: Baseline frozen, only critical bug fixes allowed

References

Templates (via $AIWG_ROOT):

• Vision: templates/requirements/vision-template.md
• Use Case: templates/requirements/use-case-spec-template.md
• Change Request: templates/requirements/change-request-template.md
• Supplemental Spec: templates/requirements/supplemental-specification-template.md
• Traceability Matrix: templates/management/traceability-matrix-template.md

Gate Criteria:

• flows/gate-criteria-by-phase.md

Orchestrator Architecture:

• docs/orchestrator-architecture.md

Natural Language Translations:

• docs/simple-language-translations.md