Use when capturing and reconciling policies, calculations, eligibility, decisions, constraints, ownership, and effective dates; use requirements-patterns to express the approved behaviour structurally.
Use when capturing and reconciling policies, calculations, eligibility, decisions, constraints, ownership, and effective dates; use requirements-patterns to express the approved behaviour structurally.
capturing and reconciling policies, calculations, eligibility, decisions, constraints, ownership, and effective dates; use requirements-patterns to express the approved behaviour structurally.
Use this procedure when the required source artefacts are available and Business rule catalogue and contradiction log is the next lifecycle deliverable.
Do Not Use When
Use requirements-patterns when that neighbouring route owns the decision or deliverable.
Do not invent missing project evidence, standards clauses, thresholds, or stakeholder decisions.
Required Inputs
Artefact
Source or provider
Required?
Behaviour when missing
Policies, process evidence, calculations, exceptions, terminology, and rule owners
Policy owners, domain experts, and elicitation evidence
Yes
Stop the affected step, name the missing source, and return only a qualified gap record.
Workflow
Inspect the required inputs and log the exact sources, versions, and unresolved assumptions.
Apply this skill's existing domain workflow and decision rules to produce .
Business rule catalogue and contradiction log
Stop when a required source, accountable decision owner, or deterministic test oracle is absent.
Recover by preserving valid work, marking the blocked scope, and returning the narrowest qualified artefact plus the next evidence needed.
Outputs
Artefact
Consumer
Acceptance condition
Business rule catalogue and contradiction log
Requirements, design, test, compliance, and operations
Required sections are populated, source links resolve, and every material requirement or decision has an observable review or test oracle.
Evidence Produced
Evidence
Reviewer
Acceptance condition
Source, decision, trace, and validation record for Business rule catalogue and contradiction log
Requirements quality reviewer
Inputs used, decisions made, checks run, failures, and unassessed items are explicit.
Capability and permission boundaries
Read and search are required. This procedure is read-only by default. Editing the reviewed artefact, publishing, production mutation, destructive action, spending, or certification requires explicit authority.
Degraded mode
Fallback: if a required file, reviewer, standard source, network check, renderer, or execution capability is unavailable, return the narrowest useful qualified result and mark the affected check not assessed; never convert an unassessed check into a pass.
Decision Rules
Choice or condition
Action
Failure or risk avoided
Two rules overlap with different outcomes or effective periods
Escalate to the rule owner and block affected requirements until resolved.
Contradictory automated decisions.
Required inputs and test oracles are complete
Continue through the existing workflow and record evidence.
A deliverable whose acceptance cannot be reproduced.
A mandatory source or owner is missing
Stop the affected branch and issue a qualified gap record.
Fabricated context or unauthorised decisions.
Quality Standards
Preserve stable identifiers and bidirectional traceability from project evidence to Business rule catalogue and contradiction log and its acceptance checks.
Apply ISO/IEEE measures only with a named metric, method, threshold, evidence source, and responsible reviewer; run the anti-slop gate before release.
Anti-Patterns
Producing Business rule catalogue and contradiction log from assumed context. Fix: cite the project source or mark the scope blocked.
Accepting a material requirement without a deterministic oracle. Fix: add a measurable result, boundary, and verification method.
Crossing into requirements-patterns without routing the decision. Fix: hand off the named input and preserve trace links.
Treating an unavailable check as passed. Fix: mark it not assessed and state the release consequence.
Claiming standards, statutory, or stakeholder approval without evidence. Fix: cite the source and reviewer or qualify the claim.
This skill isolates the domain rules that govern decisions, calculations, constraints, eligibility, timing, and compliance. It prevents rule logic from being buried inside requirements prose or code assumptions and turns it into a reviewable catalog that can drive requirements, test cases, and design controls.
When to Use
When requirements depend on policy, eligibility, pricing, approval, compliance, or timing logic
When multiple stakeholders describe the same rule differently
When calculations, thresholds, or conditional decisions affect acceptance criteria
Before formal SRS logic modeling or workflow design is finalized