本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

brd-writer

Write a Business Requirements Document. Use when the user says "write a BRD", "business requirements", "document the business need", "vision and scope document", "business case for this feature", "what does the business need", "strategic requirements", "document why we need this" - even if they don't explicitly say "BRD".

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Overview

Based on Software Requirements by Karl Wiegers & Joy Beatty - the Vision & Scope Document template that separates business objectives from product scope before any solution is discussed. Also draws on the BABOK Guide v3 (IIBA) and its BACCM model - 6 core concepts (Change, Need, Solution, Stakeholder, Value, Context) that frame every business analysis effort. The key insight from Wiegers: a BRD is not a feature list. It defines why the organization needs a change and what success looks like, leaving how to the solution team.

Workflow

Step 1: Define the business context (BACCM)

Frame the initiative using BABOK's 6 core concepts:

  • Change: What is changing and why now?
  • Need: What problem or opportunity exists?
  • Stakeholder: Who is affected and who decides?
  • Value: What business value will this deliver?
  • Context: What constraints, regulations, or dependencies exist?
  • Solution: What type of solution is envisioned (not the detailed design)?

Step 2: Write business objectives

Each objective must be measurable. Format:

BO-1: [Verb] [measurable outcome] by [timeframe]
Example: Reduce customer onboarding time from 14 days to 3 days by Q4 [year]

Link each objective to an organizational goal or KPI.

Step 3: Identify stakeholders and their needs

For each stakeholder group:

STAKEHOLDER: [Role / Group]
NEEDS: [What they need from this initiative]
SUCCESS CRITERIA: [How they will judge success]
CONSTRAINTS: [Limitations they impose]

Step 4: Define the scope boundary

Use Wiegers' scope definition approach:

  • In scope: Capabilities this initiative will deliver
  • Out of scope: Explicitly excluded items (prevents scope creep)
  • Assumptions: What you are taking as given
  • Dependencies: External factors that must be true

Step 5: Document constraints and risks

  • Business constraints: budget, timeline, regulatory deadlines
  • Technical constraints: existing systems, integration requirements, data limitations
  • Risks: what could prevent success, with likelihood and impact

Step 6: Define success criteria

Quantified metrics that determine whether the initiative achieved its objectives:

SC-1: [Metric] moves from [current baseline] to [target] within [timeframe]
Measurement method: [how it will be measured]

Step 7: Assemble the BRD

# Business Requirements Document: [Initiative Name]
**Version:** [X.X]  **Status:** [Draft / Review / Approved]
**Author:** [your name]  **Date:** [date]

## 1. Business Context (BACCM)
## 2. Business Objectives
## 3. Stakeholders and Needs
## 4. Scope (In / Out / Assumptions / Dependencies)
## 5. Constraints and Risks
## 6. Success Criteria
## 7. Approval and Sign-off

Anti-Patterns

1. Writing a feature list instead of a BRD Bad: "The system shall have a dashboard with charts and filters." Good: "Operations managers need real-time visibility into order fulfillment to reduce late shipments by 40%."

2. Unmeasurable business objectives Bad: "Improve the customer experience." Good: "Increase NPS from 32 to 50 within 6 months of launch."

3. No scope boundary Bad: BRD that lists what's included but never says what's excluded. Good: Explicit "Out of Scope" section that prevents scope creep during delivery.

4. Stakeholders listed without needs Bad: "Stakeholders: Finance, Operations, IT." Good: Each stakeholder has documented needs, success criteria, and constraints.

Quality Checklist

  • Business context framed using all 6 BACCM concepts
  • Every business objective is measurable with a target and timeframe
  • All stakeholder groups identified with needs and success criteria
  • Scope has both "in scope" and "out of scope" sections
  • Assumptions and dependencies are explicit
  • Risks documented with likelihood and impact
  • Success criteria are quantified with measurement methods
  • BRD explains "why" without prescribing "how"

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する