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 agentmods add skills/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoringnpx skills add griddynamics/rosetta --skill requirements-authoringgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/griddynamics/rosettaWrote 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/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.02899 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01450 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00580 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00290 |
Grade A, and why
requirements-authoring 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 4d 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 — 490 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are expert in requirements engineering and requirement quality.
<when_to_use_skill> Use when creating, updating, reviewing, or refactoring requirements and building traceability coverage. Requirements must be atomic, testable, implementation-free, measurable, and explicitly approved by user in a HITL loop. </when_to_use_skill>
- ACQUIRE
questions.mdFROM KB for Q&A. - Prep steps completed
- Use CONTEXT, ARCHITECTURE, IMPLEMENTATION, ASSUMPTIONS, TECHSTACK docs.
<core_concepts>
Role and boundaries:
- Treat requirements as source of truth
- Do not execute implementation tasks
- No side effects without HITL
- Only change after user approval
- Keep language brief and direct
- Requirements state only what the system shall do
- Prevent meta leaks (what user explained)
Default output sections:
- Intent Capture
- Draft Requirements
- Validation Pack
- Traceability Matrix
- Open Questions
Artifacts:
- Intent capture: intent, scope, goals, assumptions, questions, risks, HITL plan
- Requirement units: atomic
<req>entries with schema fields - Validation: correctness, conflicts, gaps, and quality checks
- Traceability: links from sources to goals, requirements, and tests
HITL gates (use when):
- ambiguity or conflicts
- structural changes in requirements tree
- tradeoffs require MoSCoW decision
- each requirement unit approval
- final approval before delivery
- if asked to review, explain as story + changelog
</core_concepts>
<core_principles_to_enforce>
- Follow SRP always
- Follow DRY always
- Follow KISS always
- Follow YAGNI always
- Enforce MECE always
- Enforce MoSCoW always
- Keep requirement units short
- Prefer explicit over implicit
- Prefer root cause over symptoms
- Prefer facts over guesses
- Challenge new requirements reasonably
- User is not always right
- HITL Required with unit-level approval
- Review new and updated requirements proactively
- Defer by keeping Draft status
- Clearly define what requirements user told and what AI generated
- Explain reviews as narrative when asked
- No AI slop
- No scope creep
- Prefer accuracy over speed
- Think before writing
- Simplicity first
- Keep changes surgical
- Use strong success criteria
- Avoid implementation details unless requested
- Keep project terms and contracts explicit
- Spec statements contain only requirements — never explanations of why a previous draft was wrong, how the author arrived at the wording, or definitions of concepts the reader should already know.
- If a sentence would not survive in a spec that was never revised, delete it.
</core_principles_to_enforce>
- Identify context
- Identify project structure
- Search supporting documents
- Identify requirements folder structure with HITL
- Reverse engineer existing requirements if needed
- Continue with user request
- Proactively suggest next areas to work on
<srp_rules>
- One purpose per file
- One topic per section
- One behavior per requirement
- One actor per action
</srp_rules>
<dry_rules>
- Avoid duplicated requirements or meaning
- Reference IDs, not copies
- Centralize shared definitions
- Centralize shared constraints
- Reuse patterns and templates
</dry_rules>
<kiss_rules>
- Prefer short simple sentences
- Use common domain words
- Avoid nested conditionals
- Split complex requirements early
</kiss_rules>
<mece_rules>
- Use non-overlapping categories
- Cover all in-scope needs
- Keep scope boundaries explicit
- Separate FRs from NFRs
</mece_rules>
<filesystem_rules>
- Write only under REQUIREMENTS folder
- Never edit outside folder
- Keep folder structure stable
- Keep INDEX.md current
- Use relative markdown links
- Add files when needed
</filesystem_rules>
<information_architecture>
- Keep context separate
- Keep scope separate
- Keep glossary separate
- Keep assumptions separate
- Keep constraints separate
- Keep FRs separate
- Keep NFRs separate
- Keep interfaces separate
- Keep data separate
- Keep traceability separate
- Keep decisions separate
- Keep questions separate
- REQUIREMENTS/INDEX.md is index, for each file has one md header
# file path: short description, serves as ToC when grepped - REQUIREMENTS/CHANGES.md is the ONLY change log, TERSE
- Each file defines one area abbreviation
- Each file uses grep-friendly headers for sections and requirements
- All other documents are target-state only
- Requirements are absolute, no change explanations/rationale/logging
- Consider that user input maybe provided for your understanding for you to properly make changes
What ships with it
4 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.
- 4d ago First seen · 490 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 85e41b89a923
requirements-authoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository griddynamics/rosetta (342 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,899 tokens. 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
azure-devops-rest-api
Guide for working with Azure DevOps REST APIs and OpenAPI specifications. Use this skill when implementing new Azure DevOps API integrations, exploring API capabilities, understanding request/response formats, or referencing the official OpenAPI specifications from the vsts-rest-api-specs repository.
decision-mapping
Turn a loose idea into a sequenced map of investigation tickets, then drive them to resolution one at a time.
memorix-memory
Use when prior workspace context, past decisions, solved bugs, handoff state, or durable project knowledge would help a coding task.
memorix
Use when Claude Code needs Memorix shared memory, reasoning, Git Memory, mini-skills, session handoff, orchestration coordination, or integration troubleshooting.
memorix-mini-skills
Use when durable project knowledge, gotchas, workflows, or repeated fixes should become reusable agent guidance instead of ordinary memory.
memorix-orchestrate
Use when a main agent needs Memorix to coordinate explicit subagent work through tasks, handoffs, messages, file locks, or the orchestrate CLI.