understanding-feature-requests

A requirements-review workflow for clarifying feature requests and finding contradictions before changes are proposed.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it when gathering requirements, checking a proposed feature against current rules, or deciding what needs clarification before implementation.
Why use it?
It helps turn vague requests into consistent requirements and catches conflicts with existing expectations early.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Part of the groundwork plugin — 41 skills, 4 hooks shipped together

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/etr/groundwork/understanding-feature-requests
Any agent
npx skills add etr/groundwork --skill understanding-feature-requests
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/etr/groundwork

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install groundwork, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 41 skills, 4 hooks.

Per session 27 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 741 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00027 $0.00741
Opus 5 $0.00014 $0.00370
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00148
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00074

Measured 3d ago against content hash cb8e5bad62d4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

understanding-feature-requests 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 3d 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.

skills/understanding-feature-requests/SKILL.md · 78 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Understanding Feature Requests

Interactive workflow for clarifying feature requests and ensuring they don't conflict with existing requirements.

Pre-flight: Model Recommendation

Your current effort level is {{effort_level}}.

Skip this step silently if effort is high, xhigh, or max (the scale is low < medium < high < xhigh < max, so xhigh and max are already above high) AND you are Sonnet or Opus. If effort is low or medium (i.e. below high), you MUST show the recommendation prompt — regardless of model. If you are not Sonnet or Opus, you MUST show the recommendation prompt - regardless of effort level.

Otherwise → use AskUserQuestion:

{
  "questions": [{
    "question": "Do you want to switch? Contradiction detection in feature requirements benefits from consistent reasoning.\n\nTo switch: cancel, run `/effort high` (and `/model sonnet` if on Haiku), then re-invoke this skill.",
    "header": "Recommended: Sonnet or Opus at high effort",
    "options": [
      { "label": "Continue" },
      { "label": "Cancel — I'll switch first" }
    ],
    "multiSelect": false
  }]
}

If the user selects "Cancel — I'll switch first": output the switching commands above and stop. Do not proceed with the skill.

Step 1: Clarify the Request

When the user proposes a feature or change, ask clarifying questions to understand:

Core Questions (always ask):

  • What problem does this solve for the user?
  • Who is the target user/persona?
  • What is the expected outcome or behavior?

Exploratory Questions (for open-ended or vague requests):

  • "What inspired this feature idea?"
  • "Have you seen this done well elsewhere? What did you like about it?"
  • "What would make this feature 'delightful' vs just 'adequate'?"
  • "What's the simplest version that would provide value?"
  • "If you had to cut half the scope, what would you keep?"

Conditional Questions (ask as relevant):

  • What triggers this behavior? (for event-driven features)
  • What are the edge cases or error conditions?
  • What is explicitly out of scope?
  • Are there dependencies on other features?
  • What metrics would indicate success?
  • How could this fail? What are the possible risks and dangers?
  • Could we do this in any other way?

Read the full file on GitHub · 78 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 78 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A cb8e5bad62d4

Subscribe to this mod's changes

understanding-feature-requests is a skill published in the GitHub repository etr/groundwork (42 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 741 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

auto-perf-optimize

Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.

microsoft/vscode · 62 tokens

chat-perf

Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.

microsoft/vscode · 51 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens