Software Requirements Expert

Priority: P0 (CRITICAL)

Define the technical "How" with verifiable requirements.

1. SRS/FRS Discovery

• Confirm linked PRD requirements (REQ-*) and AC IDs.

• Preserve trace: BRD-OBJ-* -> REQ-* -> AC-* -> SRS-* -> test evidence.

• Missing behavioral acceptance criteria, accountable owner, consequential design approval, or verification prerequisites route EVERY affected slice back to requirements/planning regardless of new or existing scope. Bounded low-risk equivalence (approved ticket with behavioral AC, owner, scope fence, approval, verification lane) may replace separate SRS files and formal IDs, but never waives behavioral prerequisites; do not infer product scope from code.

• Sensitive changes require technical design and explicit human/governance approval per requirements modeling §1; low-risk equivalence never removes that floor.

• Define functional flows: trigger, inputs, validations, outputs, errors.

• For complex flows, use one actor, one goal, one session; split normal, alternate, and exception courses.

• Define interface contracts: API, events, storage, external integrations.

• Define NFRs: numeric thresholds where appropriate (latency, availability, scalability) and categorical verifiable invariants where appropriate (security, access control, integrity); never fabricate numbers.

• Define constraints: migration, compatibility, compliance, rollout.

2. Drafting Workflow

• Load references/srs-template.md.
• Slug Alignment: Use the same [slug] from the source docs/prd/prd-[slug].md to maintain filename-level traceability.
• Write one requirement card per statement with stable SRS-* IDs.
• Map each SRS-* to source PRD REQ-* and verification lane.
• Map every technical behavior to PRD ACs, test lane, and evidence target; one observable behavior per AC with necessary preconditions.
• Include statement, priority, status, input/output/error behavior, NFR impact, measurement method, and evidence target.
• Add outcome report: feature_status, requirement trace, completed/missing evidence, decision needed, and recommended next workflow.
• Write to docs/srs/srs-[slug].md.

3. Verification Mapping

• Each SRS-* has test evidence plan (unit/integration/E2E/manual).
• Failure modes and fallback behavior are explicit.
• Permissions and privacy controls mapped to requirements as verifiable categorical invariants.
• Measurement or verification method exists for each NFR.

Anti-Patterns

• No mixed requirements and implementation tasks in same statement.
• No NFR claims without verifiable criteria: use numeric thresholds where appropriate, categorical invariants for security/access; never fabricate numbers.
• No interface contract without input/output/error schema.
• No requirement without trace link to source and verification.
• No implementation handoff without behavioral ACs and verification lanes mapped to each slice; formal PRD/SRS IDs and separate documents may be replaced only by approved low-risk ticket equivalence (carrying behavioral AC, owner, approval, scope fence, verification lane).
• No happy-path-only flow for complex user/system interactions.

References

• SRS Template
• FRS Checklist
• Requirements Baseline