菜单
Clarify ambiguous requirements through focused dialogue before implementation. Use when requirements are unclear, features are complex (>2 days), or involve cross-team coordination. Ask two core questions - Why? (YAGNI check) and Simpler? (KISS check) - to ensure clarity before coding.
Analyze recent code changes via git history and extract software engineering lessons. Use when the user asks 'what is the lesson here?', 'what can I learn from this?', 'engineering takeaway', 'what did I just learn?', 'reflect on this code', or wants to extract principles from recent work.
Use when writing prose humans will read—documentation, commit messages, error messages, explanations, reports, or UI text. Applies Strunk's timeless rules for clearer, stronger, more professional writing.
Comprehensive guide for creating software diagrams using Mermaid syntax. Use when users need to create, visualize, or document software through diagrams including class diagrams (domain modeling, object-oriented design), sequence diagrams (application flows, API interactions, code execution), flowcharts (processes, algorithms, user journeys), entity relationship diagrams (database schemas), C4 architecture diagrams (system context, containers, components), state diagrams, git graphs, pie charts, gantt charts, or any other diagram type. Triggers include requests to "diagram", "visualize", "model", "map out", "show the flow", or when explaining system architecture, database design, code structure, or user/application flows.
Use when writing or improving README files. Not all READMEs are the same — provides templates and guidance matched to your audience and project type.
Manual-only skill for minimizing total codebase size. Only activate when explicitly requested by user. Measures success by final code amount, not effort. Bias toward deletion.
Create high-quality git commits: review/stage intended changes, split into logical commits, and write clear commit messages (including Conventional Commits). Use when the user asks to commit, craft a commit message, stage changes, or split work into multiple commits.
| name | requirements-clarity |
| description | Clarify ambiguous requirements through focused dialogue before implementation. Use when requirements are unclear, features are complex (>2 days), or involve cross-team coordination. Ask two core questions - Why? (YAGNI check) and Simpler? (KISS check) - to ensure clarity before coding. |
Automatically transforms vague requirements into actionable PRDs through systematic clarification with a 100-point scoring system.
When invoked, detect vague requirements:
Vague Feature Requests
Missing Technical Context
Incomplete Specifications
Ambiguous Scope
Do NOT activate when:
Systematic Questioning
Quality-Driven Iteration
Actionable Output
Input: User's requirement description
Tasks:
1.0 unless user specifies otherwise)./docs/prds/ exists for PRD outputAssessment Rubric:
Functional Clarity: /30 points
- Clear inputs/outputs: 10 pts
- User interaction defined: 10 pts
- Success criteria stated: 10 pts
Technical Specificity: /25 points
- Technology stack mentioned: 8 pts
- Integration points identified: 8 pts
- Constraints specified: 9 pts
Implementation Completeness: /25 points
- Edge cases considered: 8 pts
- Error handling mentioned: 9 pts
- Data validation specified: 8 pts
Business Context: /20 points
- Problem statement clear: 7 pts
- Target users identified: 7 pts
- Success metrics defined: 6 pts
Initial Response Format:
I understand your requirement. Let me help you refine this specification.
**Current Clarity Score**: X/100
**Clear Aspects**:
- [List what's clear]
**Needs Clarification**:
- [List gaps]
Let me systematically clarify these points...
Identify missing information across four dimensions:
1. Functional Scope
2. User Interaction
3. Technical Constraints
4. Business Value
Question Strategy:
Question Format:
I need to clarify the following points to complete the requirements document:
1. **[Category]**: [Specific question]?
- For example: [Example if helpful]
2. **[Category]**: [Specific question]?
3. **[Category]**: [Specific question]?
Please provide your answers, and I'll continue refining the PRD.
After Each User Response:
Score Update Format:
Thank you for the additional information!
**Clarity Score Update**: X/100 → Y/100
**New Clarified Content**:
- [Summarize new information]
**Remaining Points to Clarify**:
- [List remaining gaps if score < 90]
[If score < 90: Continue with next round of questions]
[If score ≥ 90: "Perfect! I will now generate the complete PRD document..."]
Once clarity score ≥ 90, generate comprehensive PRD.
Output File:
./docs/prds/{feature_name}-v{version}-prd.mdUse the Write tool to create or update this file. Derive {version} from the document version recorded in the PRD (default 1.0).
# {Feature Name} - Product Requirements Document (PRD)
## Requirements Description
### Background
- **Business Problem**: [Describe the business problem to solve]
- **Target Users**: [Target user groups]
- **Value Proposition**: [Value this feature brings]
### Feature Overview
- **Core Features**: [List of main features]
- **Feature Boundaries**: [What is and isn't included]
- **User Scenarios**: [Typical usage scenarios]
### Detailed Requirements
- **Input/Output**: [Specific input/output specifications]
- **User Interaction**: [User operation flow]
- **Data Requirements**: [Data structures and validation rules]
- **Edge Cases**: [Edge case handling]
## Design Decisions
### Technical Approach
- **Architecture Choice**: [Technical architecture decisions and rationale]
- **Key Components**: [List of main technical components]
- **Data Storage**: [Data models and storage solutions]
- **Interface Design**: [API/interface specifications]
### Constraints
- **Performance Requirements**: [Response time, throughput, etc.]
- **Compatibility**: [System compatibility requirements]
- **Security**: [Security considerations]
- **Scalability**: [Future expansion considerations]
### Risk Assessment
- **Technical Risks**: [Potential technical risks and mitigation plans]
- **Dependency Risks**: [External dependencies and alternatives]
- **Schedule Risks**: [Timeline risks and response strategies]
## Acceptance Criteria
### Functional Acceptance
- [ ] Feature 1: [Specific acceptance conditions]
- [ ] Feature 2: [Specific acceptance conditions]
- [ ] Feature 3: [Specific acceptance conditions]
### Quality Standards
- [ ] Code Quality: [Code standards and review requirements]
- [ ] Test Coverage: [Testing requirements and coverage]
- [ ] Performance Metrics: [Performance test pass criteria]
- [ ] Security Review: [Security review requirements]
### User Acceptance
- [ ] User Experience: [UX acceptance criteria]
- [ ] Documentation: [Documentation delivery requirements]
- [ ] Training Materials: [If needed, training material requirements]
## Execution Phases
### Phase 1: Preparation
**Goal**: Environment preparation and technical validation
- [ ] Task 1: [Specific task description]
- [ ] Task 2: [Specific task description]
- **Deliverables**: [Phase deliverables]
- **Time**: [Estimated time]
### Phase 2: Core Development
**Goal**: Implement core functionality
- [ ] Task 1: [Specific task description]
- [ ] Task 2: [Specific task description]
- **Deliverables**: [Phase deliverables]
- **Time**: [Estimated time]
### Phase 3: Integration & Testing
**Goal**: Integration and quality assurance
- [ ] Task 1: [Specific task description]
- [ ] Task 2: [Specific task description]
- **Deliverables**: [Phase deliverables]
- **Time**: [Estimated time]
### Phase 4: Deployment
**Goal**: Release and monitoring
- [ ] Task 1: [Specific task description]
- [ ] Task 2: [Specific task description]
- **Deliverables**: [Phase deliverables]
- **Time**: [Estimated time]
---
**Document Version**: 1.0
**Created**: {timestamp}
**Clarification Rounds**: {clarification_rounds}
**Quality Score**: {quality_score}/100
- [ ] format)