xc881-requirement-analysis

name	xc881-requirement-analysis
description	Primary owner for requirements, scope, acceptance criteria, PRDs, and issue/PR triage. Separate explicit/inferred needs, persist task queues when warranted, and delegate only blocking research or reads. Implementation detail alone is not requirement intent.
when_to_use	Use for scope/AC/tracker deliverables. Persist only when the gate passes; delegate bounded uncertainty, then resume the same owner.
display_name	xc881需求分析
version	2.10.0
category	requirements
tags	["intent-routing","requirements","prd","mvp","acceptance-criteria","issue-triage","tracker","xc881"]
aliases	["xc881-requirement-analysis","xc881需求分析","需求分析","xc881分诊","xc881拆issue"]

xc881 Requirement

Intent-routed requirement owner. Direct calls select it; implicit use requires scope/AC/tracker as the primary outcome. Incidental implementation uncertainty stays with the base/current owner. Run only the needed branch. No code.

Goal:

request → spec → ER/IR → scope → AC → risk → handoff

Reference files live under ./references/.

Reference Index:

• ./references/english-spec-first-policy.md: rough/mixed request.
• ./references/implicit-requirement-inference.md: hidden needs.
• ./references/existing-project-feature-analysis.md: existing change.
• ./references/issue-tracker-triage.md: issue/PR/PRD tracker state, Agent Brief, out-of-scope, and tracker ops.
• ./references/requirement-process-artifact.md: artifact gate, req-process queue, resume/update protocol.
• ./references/requirement-output-contract.md: output.
• ./references/requirement-quality-rubric.md: strict check.

When opening reference files, always use the exact relative path shown above. Do not assume reference files are located beside SKILL.md.

Steps:

1. Confirm requirement/triage intent from direct invocation, wording, or delegated context.
2. Spec: Goal / Inputs / Constraints / Output / Notes.
3. Classify: new / existing / review.
4. Resolve an explicit or unambiguous conversational artifact first. Run bounded candidate-path search only when persistence or implementation handoff is likely; clearly chat-only work does not scan req-process. Reuse one semantic match, ask once for multiple matches, or apply the gate when none match.
5. If technical uncertainty blocks scope or AC judgment, use bounded $xc881-solution-research, then continue without user reconfirmation.
6. If project code/test/config must be inspected, apply the task+project complexity gate: perform a simple exact/local/low-risk read here, or delegate a complex/tracked read to $xc881-coding-skills, then resume from evidence.
7. Produce ER/IR, scope, FR/NFR/AC, and P0-P3 risks; one blocking question max.
8. If the artifact gate passes, create dependency-aware vertical queue items for Coding. Otherwise keep a compact self-contained chat contract. Reused artifacts preserve history, append IDs after the tail, and reopen from the first new item. Persist verification plans and queue state, never results/logs.
9. Keep the full structured analysis in req-process when persisted, then report a compact human-readable summary. Chat-only work must remain self-contained.
10. Validate, then hand every write and selected complex/tracked read to Coding with exact artifact/current/next/blockers. A queued implementation continues across items; after context compaction it resumes the same owner/current automatically. Active ownership returns to this requirement run after bounded delegation, and no second invocation or per-item “continue” is needed unless the user requests stepwise control or a real blocker occurs.

User-facing output:

需求结论:
这次会做:
完成标准:
需要注意:        # only when relevant
需要确认:        # only when blocked; include recommendation + fallback
下一步:
开发记录:

Rules: route only on requirement/triage intent; no code; inferred ≠ confirmed; AC must be testable; persisted documents retain Spec/ER/IR/Scope/FR/NFR/AC/Risk while chat translates decisions into plain language; omit irrelevant empty headings; persisted progress is authoritative over chat; use $xc881-solution-research only for bounded technical uncertainty, and return its result to the same requirement run.