Validate Requirements Artifact

Validate: $ARGUMENTS

Validation Overview

This command runs comprehensive validation on requirements artifacts to ensure quality, completeness, and consistency. The validation produces a detailed report with scores, identified issues, and actionable recommendations.

What Can Be Validated

• SRS Document: Full IEEE 830 compliance check
• Requirements List: Quality and completeness check
• Interview Notes: Information completeness check
• Analysis Report: Coverage and accuracy check
• Traceability Matrix: Completeness and correctness check

Validation Checks

1. Completeness Validation

SRS Completeness (IEEE 830)

Section 1: Introduction
  [ ] 1.1 Purpose stated
  [ ] 1.2 Scope defined
  [ ] 1.3 All terms defined
  [ ] 1.4 References listed
  [ ] 1.5 Overview provided

Section 2: Overall Description
  [ ] 2.1 Product perspective
  [ ] 2.2 Functions summarized
  [ ] 2.3 User characteristics
  [ ] 2.4 Constraints
  [ ] 2.5 Assumptions

Section 3: Specific Requirements
  [ ] 3.1 External interfaces
  [ ] 3.2 Functional requirements
  [ ] 3.3 Non-functional requirements

Appendices
  [ ] Glossary
  [ ] Analysis models
  [ ] Traceability matrix

2. Requirement Quality (SMART)

For each requirement:

Criterion	Check
Specific	Clear and unambiguous?
Measurable	Quantifiable criteria?
Achievable	Technically feasible?
Relevant	Traces to business value?
Testable	Test cases can be written?

3. Consistency Validation

• No conflicting requirements
• No duplicate requirements
• Consistent terminology
• Consistent formatting
• Valid cross-references

4. Traceability Validation

• All requirements trace to business objectives
• No orphan requirements
• Dependencies documented
• Test case mapping exists (or planned)

5. Assumption Validation

• All assumptions documented
• Impact if false identified
• Confirmation status tracked

Validation Report Format

# Validation Report

## Summary
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Artifact | {Type} |
| Completeness Score | {X}% |
| Quality Score | {X}% |
| Issues Found | {N} |
| Critical Issues | {N} |

## Scores Breakdown

### Completeness: {X}%
| Section | Status | Score |
|---------|--------|-------|
| {Section} | {Complete/Partial/Missing} | {%} |

### Quality: {X}%
| Factor | Score |
|--------|-------|
| SMART Compliance | {%} |
| Traceability | {%} |
| Consistency | {%} |
| Clarity | {%} |

## Issues Found

### Critical (Must Fix)
| ID | Issue | Location | Recommendation |
|----|-------|----------|----------------|
| C1 | {Issue} | {Where} | {Fix} |

### High Priority
| ID | Issue | Location | Recommendation |
|----|-------|----------|----------------|
| H1 | {Issue} | {Where} | {Fix} |

### Medium Priority
| ID | Issue | Location | Recommendation |
|----|-------|----------|----------------|
| M1 | {Issue} | {Where} | {Fix} |

### Low Priority
| ID | Issue | Location | Recommendation |
|----|-------|----------|----------------|
| L1 | {Issue} | {Where} | {Fix} |

## Unconfirmed Assumptions
| ID | Assumption | Impact if False | Status |
|----|------------|-----------------|--------|
| A1 | {Assumption} | {Impact} | Needs confirmation |

## User Confirmation Required
[ ] {Item needing confirmation}

## Status: {PASS / CONDITIONAL PASS / FAIL}

## Recommended Next Steps
1. {Action}
2. {Action}

Scoring Methodology

Completeness Score

Section Weights:
- Introduction: 10%
- Overall Description: 20%
- Functional Requirements: 35%
- Non-Functional Requirements: 25%
- Appendices: 10%

Score = Sum of (Section % Complete * Weight)

Quality Score

Factor Weights:
- SMART Compliance: 30%
- Traceability: 25%
- Consistency: 20%
- Clarity: 15%
- Confirmation Status: 10%

Score = Sum of (Factor % Achieved * Weight)

Status Thresholds

Score	Status
90-100%	PASS
75-89%	CONDITIONAL PASS
60-74%	FAIL (revisions needed)
Below 60%	FAIL (major rework)

Validation Options

Full Validation

Complete validation of all aspects.

/business-analyst:validate all

Quick Validation

Essential checks only (faster).

/business-analyst:validate quick

Specific Checks

Run specific validation only.

/business-analyst:validate completeness
/business-analyst:validate quality
/business-analyst:validate consistency
/business-analyst:validate traceability

Validate Specific Artifact

/business-analyst:validate SRS
/business-analyst:validate requirements-list
/business-analyst:validate {file-path}

Interactive Validation

After validation, I will:

1. Present Summary: "The validation found {N} issues."
2. Offer Details: "Would you like to see the full report?"
3. Confirm Assumptions: "Can you verify these {N} assumptions?"
4. Suggest Fixes: "Here's how to address the critical issues."
5. Offer Re-validation: "After fixes, shall I validate again?"

Feedback Loop Integration

Feeding Back to Business Analyst

The validation doesn't just report issues - it generates structured feedback that is fed back to improve the requirements. This creates a continuous improvement cycle.

Feedback Output Format

After validation, generate actionable feedback:

## Validation Feedback for Requirements Improvement

### Immediate Corrections Required
| Issue ID | Current State | Required Change | How to Fix |
|----------|---------------|-----------------|------------|
| FB-001 | FR-023 is vague | Add metrics | Ask: "What response time is acceptable?" |
| FB-002 | NFR-SEC missing | Add auth requirements | Use NFR-SEC template |

### Specific Rewrites
BEFORE: "The system should be user-friendly"
AFTER: "The system shall achieve SUS score >= 80"
REASON: Not measurable → Now has specific metric

### Questions to Ask Stakeholder
1. [For NFR-PERF-001] "What is the expected concurrent user count?"
2. [For NFR-SEC-001] "What authentication method is preferred?"
3. [For ASM-001] "Can we assume modern browser support only?"

### Assumptions to Confirm
| Assumption | Impact if Wrong | Question |
|------------|-----------------|----------|
| Modern browsers | Need legacy support | "Confirm browser support?" |
| 99.9% uptime | Higher availability | "Is 99.9% acceptable?" |

### Templates for Missing Requirements
[Provide templates for any missing requirement types]

### Conflict Resolutions Needed
[List conflicts with resolution options]

Feedback Processing Workflow

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    FEEDBACK IMPROVEMENT CYCLE                    │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                 │
│  VALIDATE ──▶ GENERATE FEEDBACK ──▶ PROCESS FEEDBACK            │
│      ▲                                    │                     │
│      │                                    ▼                     │
│      │                           ┌────────────────┐             │
│      │                           │ Apply Fixes:   │             │
│      │                           │ - Rewrite reqs │             │
│      │                           │ - Add missing  │             │
│      │                           │ - Ask questions│             │
│      │                           │ - Resolve      │             │
│      │                           │   conflicts    │             │
│      │                           └────────────────┘             │
│      │                                    │                     │
│      └────────────────────────────────────┘                     │
│                    RE-VALIDATE                                  │
│                                                                 │
│  Continue until: Score >= 90% OR User approves                  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Improvement Tracking

Track progress across validation cycles:

| Cycle | Completeness | Quality | Issues | Status |
|-------|--------------|---------|--------|--------|
| 1     | 65%          | 70%     | 15     | FAIL   |
| 2     | 82%          | 85%     | 6      | COND   |
| 3     | 95%          | 92%     | 2      | PASS   |

Continuous Improvement

The validator helps maintain quality by:

• Identifying issues early
• Feeding back actionable improvements to the business analyst
• Generating targeted stakeholder questions
• Providing specific rewrites for vague requirements
• Tracking progress over iterations
• Ensuring stakeholder confirmation
• Maintaining documentation standards

Getting Started

What would you like me to validate?

1. An SRS document generated in this conversation?
2. A requirements list we've been building?
3. Findings from analysis we've conducted?
4. A specific file or document you can point me to?

Or just say "validate" and I'll check everything we've discussed so far.

After validation, I will generate structured feedback that can be directly processed to improve the requirements.