validkeys/sherpy

business-requirements-interview

Intelligent, context-aware interview that analyzes your project idea first, identifies gaps, then asks targeted questions. Adapts dynamically based on responses. Generates business-requirements.yaml.

First seen Mar 5, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add validkeys/sherpy --skill business-requirements-interview

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from validkeys/sherpy · top by installs.

npx skills add validkeys/sherpy

Browse all from validkeys/sherpy

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 1
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 1
Status Active

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 5,306 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 238 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 104 installs

SKILL.md

Business Requirements Interview

Analyzes your project idea, identifies gaps, asks context-specific questions.

Process

1. Understand the Idea

Ask user for project description:

"Describe your project: the problem, who it's for, what you want to achieve."

Analyze their response:

  • Domain (CLI, web app, API, etc.)
  • What's clear vs unclear
  • Missing pieces (users, scope, constraints)
  • Questions to ask

2. Ask Context-Aware Questions

Generate questions specific to their project, not generic forms.

Example - CLI Validator:

User: "Build YAML validator for CI/CD"

Questions:

  1. "What schema format? JSON Schema, custom DSL, code-based?"
  2. "Who uses it? CI/CD only, or local dev too?"
  3. "Error output format? JSON, prose, both?"
  4. "Performance needs? Thousands of files or dozens?"

Example - Web Dashboard:

User: "Analytics dashboard for metrics"

Questions:

  1. "Who views it? Execs, PMs, analysts, mixed?"
  2. "What metrics? Revenue, usage, engagement?"
  3. "Real-time or batch? How fresh?"
  4. "Data sources? DB, APIs, warehouse?"

3. Adapt Based on Answers

Each answer shapes next question:

  • CI/CD → exit codes, automation
  • Local dev → UX, error messages
  • Multiple users → access control

Question Types

Clarification: "By 'validate', do you mean schema, business rules, or both?"

Scope: "Which are in v1: [specific list], or is that v2?"

Priority: "Speed, detailed errors, or extensibility - which is critical?"

Constraints: "Any limits on tech, timeline, team that shape this?"

Success: "How will you know it's working? What metrics matter?"

Structure Template

BEFORE generating, review: [references/structure-template.yaml](references/structure-template.yaml)

This shows the exact YAML structure required. Use it as your template.

Critical structural rules:

  • overview.scope → OBJECT with inscope and outof_scope arrays (NOT a string with |)
  • timeline → OBJECT with phase, duration, milestones (NOT a string)
  • functional_requirements[].id → Sequential: FR-1, FR-2, FR-3 (no gaps, no FR-001)
  • use_cases[].actor → Must match a personas[].name exactly or be "System"

Required Coverage

Gather detail for:

  • Problem: What, who, why it matters
  • Value: Measurable impact
  • Scope: In/out v1
  • Users: Who, goals, pain points
  • Use Cases: Top 3-5 scenarios
  • Requirements: 5-10 specific, testable
  • Success: Quantifiable targets
  • Constraints: Tech, business, timeline
  • Risks: What could go wrong

Avoid

❌ Generic: "What problem are you solving?" ✅ Specific: "Should errors be JSON (machine), prose (human), or both?"

❌ Broad: "1. Developers 2. Teams 3. Enterprise" ✅ Contextual: "1. Devs validating configs 2. Platform enforcing standards 3. Both"

Progress Tracking

Save to {base_directory}/artifacts/business-interview.jsonl:

{"category":"analysis","question":"initial_idea","answer":"CLI YAML validator","timestamp":"2024-05-14T10:30:00Z"}
{"category":"schema","question":"Schema format?","answer":"JSON Schema","rationale":"Industry standard","timestamp":"2024-05-14T10:32:15Z"}

Output

Generate {base_directory}/requirements/business-requirements.yaml when complete.

CRITICAL: Follow the exact YAML structure in [references/structure-template.yaml](references/structure-template.yaml).

For detailed schema documentation, see [references/output-spec.md](references/output-spec.md).

The output MUST include:

  • project, version, generated (root fields)
  • overview (problem, value_proposition, scope)
  • personas (name, description, goals, pain_points)
  • use_cases (name, actor, description, outcome)
  • functional_requirements (id: FR-1, FR-2..., category, description, priority, rationale)
  • nonfunctionalrequirements
  • success_criteria
  • constraints
  • dependencies
  • timeline
  • assumptions
  • risks

ID Format: FR-1, FR-2, FR-3 (sequential, no gaps)

See [references/example.yaml](references/example.yaml) for a complete example.

Confirm before generating:

"Ready to draft requirements doc with:
- Problem and value prop
- 3 personas with use cases
- 8 functional requirements
- Success criteria and constraints

Proceed?"

Validation

sherpy validate -t business-requirements -f {base_directory}/requirements/business-requirements.yaml --strict

Fix errors immediately.

Gap Analysis

Check for:

  • ✅ Specific, testable requirements
  • ✅ Clear personas with distinct goals
  • ✅ Measurable success criteria
  • ✅ Explicit scope boundaries
  • ✅ Identified risks with mitigation

If gaps: "Noticed [gap]. Address now or proceed?"

Next Steps

  1. Validate with sherpy validate
  2. Review gaps
  3. /technical-requirements-interview
  4. /implementation-planner

Key Difference

Old: Canned questions, generic options, same for all projects New: Analyze first, context-aware questions, adaptive, intelligent conversation