Repository navigation
planning/prd: add a quality-requirements (NFR) section #8322
Description
Context
/planning:prd has no slot for quality requirements (often called non-functional requirements, NFRs): no file under plugins/planning/skills/prd/ mentions them. A PRD can lock problem, users and success metrics while leaving performance, reliability, security and similar targets unstated, so they surface late, at interview or design time.
The malleable-design-defaults effort adds a quality-requirement prompt to /planning:interview (a new interview/context/nfr-prompts.md) and left /planning:prd out of scope on purpose.
Proposed work
- Add a quality-requirements section to the PRD templates, prompted from the same list the interview uses (
interview/context/nfr-prompts.md, once it lands) so the list keeps one home. - Ask for a measurable target only where one matters, and scale the prompt with the PRD tier.
- Use the term "quality requirement (non-functional requirement, NFR)": ISO/IEC 25010:2023 says "quality requirements", and Bass, Clements and Kazman (Software Architecture in Practice) keep quality-attribute requirements separate from constraints.
Acceptance criteria
- Each PRD tier template carries a quality-requirements section.
- The PRD skill reads the interview's prompt list rather than copying it.
- One eval case shows a PRD run capturing a quality requirement with a measurable target.
References
plugins/planning/skills/prd/SKILL.md- ISO/IEC 25010:2023 (product quality model)
- Follows the malleable-design-defaults plan (interview NFR prompt phase)
Metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Category | unspecified |
| Area | planning |
| Ecosystem | unspecified |
Activity
github-actions commentedon Oct 18, 2026
Proposed work class: work-class: scoped
Basis: automated intake triage; the lanes App applied this class.
Size: Medium
Complexity: Medium
Uncertainty: Known
Flags: none
Blocked by: none
Decision comment (#8322 (comment)):
That decision settles the open questions.
What I understood: add a quality-requirements (NFR) section to each
/planning:prdtier template. The PRD skill should read the interview's prompt list instead of copying it. One eval case should show a measurable target being captured. No duplicates found.Automated triage, applied by the lanes App.
github-actions commentedon Oct 26, 2026
The triage sweep dispatched intake triage for this issue (attempt 1 of 2).
melodic-automation-lanes commentedon Oct 26, 2026
The token broker refused the work-resolve-issue run that
agent-readystarted because the lanes kill switch was on, so it did no work. work-unblock removed and addedagent-readyback to start a fresh run. A kill-switch refusal is no fault in this issue or the lanes, so it never counts against later re-fires; after limits.limit-stops-per-issue of them since a person last addedagent-readyor a run last reported, work-unblock waits longer before each one, up to 24 hours.melodic-automation-lanes commentedon Oct 26, 2026
The work-resolve-issue lane stopped partway through this issue and needs a person.
Why, in the run's own words:
Run: https://github.com/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins/actions/runs/40355135920
To retry, remove
needs-humanand addagent-readyagain.kyle-sexton commentedon Oct 27, 2026
Released for re-triage under the owner's 2026-10-26 rule: a person is involved only for "1. A change in original intent/vision 2. Something comes up during implementation ... that alters intent/vision or the primary design 3. If there is a HIGH/CRITICAL security issue". None applies here, so the hold label came off and intake triage runs again now.
To hold this issue again, add
needs-human(orstatus: needs-decision) and name which of the three applies.kyle-sexton commentedon Oct 30, 2026
Decision recorded. The stop was a run defect ("reported done but committed nothing"), and
interview/context/nfr-prompts.md, the list the body points at, is on main. The body's acceptance criteria stand: