Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add Aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow --skill requirements-elicitationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflowWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/requirements-elicitation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/requirements-elicitation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/requirements-elicitation/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/requirements-elicitation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow/requirements-elicitation.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00043 | $0.01394 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00697 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00279 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00139 |
Grade A, and why
requirements-elicitation scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 10d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 135 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Requirements Elicitation
Overview
When user proposes a requirement, do NOT jump straight to implementation. Instead, act as a senior business analyst: read existing materials first, then systematically ask questions dimension by dimension until both sides reach full consensus on what to build.
Output language: Read ecw.yml → project.output_language. All artifact headings, table headers, and labels in requirements-summary.md follow this language.
Announce at start: "Using ecw:requirements-elicitation for systematic requirement analysis."
When to Use
- User proposes a new feature or requirement
- User describes a business need or change request
- User says "I want to...", "We need to...", "Add a feature..."
- User provides a PRD, specification, or requirement document for implementation
When NOT to use:
- User gives a precise, fully-specified technical task ("fix the null pointer on line 42")
- User explicitly says "just do it, don't ask questions"
Core Flow
digraph requirements {
rankdir=TB;
"User proposes requirement" [shape=doublecircle];
"Read existing materials" [shape=box];
"Restate understanding" [shape=box];
"Select uncovered dimension" [shape=box];
"Ask 3-5 questions" [shape=box];
"User answers" [shape=box];
"Generate follow-ups from answers" [shape=diamond];
"All dimensions covered?" [shape=diamond];
"Synthesis analysis" [shape=box];
"Present findings to user" [shape=box];
"Produce final requirement summary" [shape=box];
"User confirms?" [shape=diamond];
"invoke ecw:writing-plans" [shape=doublecircle];
"User proposes requirement" -> "Read existing materials";
"Read existing materials" -> "Restate understanding";
"Restate understanding" -> "Select uncovered dimension";
"Select uncovered dimension" -> "Ask 3-5 questions";
"Ask 3-5 questions" -> "User answers";
"User answers" -> "Generate follow-ups from answers";
"Generate follow-ups from answers" -> "Ask 3-5 questions" [label="has new questions"];
"Generate follow-ups from answers" -> "All dimensions covered?" [label="no follow-ups"];
"All dimensions covered?" -> "Select uncovered dimension" [label="no"];
"All dimensions covered?" -> "Synthesis analysis" [label="yes"];
"Synthesis analysis" -> "Present findings to user";
"Present findings to user" -> "Produce final requirement summary";
"Produce final requirement summary" -> "User confirms?";
"User confirms?" -> "Select uncovered dimension" [label="no, gaps found"];
"User confirms?" -> "invoke ecw:writing-plans" [label="yes"];
}
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 10d ago First seen · 135 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A ee248b8f6f2c
requirements-elicitation is a skill published in the GitHub repository Aimeerrhythm/enterprise-change-workflow (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 1,394 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
g-review
Run the review gate on the current branch diff. Runs the test suite, captures the diff, and dispatches code-lead, which verifies done conditions and reviews the diff itself. Issues MERGE READY or HOLD.
g-audit
Full-codebase or targeted code quality audit. Detects SOLID violations, code smells, architectural drift, dead code, and test coverage gaps. Targeted scope produces an inline report. Whole-codebase scope produces a prioritised roadmap milestone.
g-refactor
Guided refactor workflow — identify target, pre-analyse, spec, approve, execute, review. Accepts a scope path, an audit milestone file, or runs interactively. Safe-by-default: checks test coverage before execution and runs the full review gate after.
g-blast-radius
Analyse the blast radius of a planned change. Inputs a file path, feature name, or list of paths from a plan. Outputs the set of dependent files (forward and reverse references), a per-file volatility score (commit frequency proxy), and a total blast-radius rating (low / moderate / wide). Read-only.
cross-verify
A cross-checking skill that reviews decisions, designs, documents, and implementations from four viewpoints.
decompose
Break a large goal into 3–8 sequenced tasks, each one /eng → /tdd cycle. Writes to specs/{slug}.todos.md when a spec exists, root TODOS.md otherwise. /decompose — decompose a feature or goal /decompose re-entry — resume where you left off (auto-detected).