Business Rules Analysis Skill
Use When
- capturing and reconciling policies, calculations, eligibility, decisions, constraints, ownership, and effective dates; use requirements-patterns to express the approved behaviour structurally.
- Use this procedure when the required source artefacts are available and
Business rule catalogue and contradiction log is the next lifecycle deliverable.
Do Not Use When
- Use
requirements-patterns when that neighbouring route owns the decision or deliverable.
- Do not invent missing project evidence, standards clauses, thresholds, or stakeholder decisions.
Required Inputs
| Artefact |
Source or provider |
Required? |
Behaviour when missing |
| Policies, process evidence, calculations, exceptions, terminology, and rule owners |
Policy owners, domain experts, and elicitation evidence |
Yes |
Stop the affected step, name the missing source, and return only a qualified gap record. |
Workflow
- Inspect the required inputs and log the exact sources, versions, and unresolved assumptions.
- Apply this skill's existing domain workflow and decision rules to produce
Business rule catalogue and contradiction log.
- Stop when a required source, accountable decision owner, or deterministic test oracle is absent.
- Recover by preserving valid work, marking the blocked scope, and returning the narrowest qualified artefact plus the next evidence needed.
Outputs
| Artefact |
Consumer |
Acceptance condition |
| Business rule catalogue and contradiction log |
Requirements, design, test, compliance, and operations |
Required sections are populated, source links resolve, and every material requirement or decision has an observable review or test oracle. |
Evidence Produced
| Evidence |
Reviewer |
Acceptance condition |
Source, decision, trace, and validation record for Business rule catalogue and contradiction log |
Requirements quality reviewer |
Inputs used, decisions made, checks run, failures, and unassessed items are explicit. |
Capability and permission boundaries
Read and search are required. This procedure is read-only by default. Editing the reviewed artefact, publishing, production mutation, destructive action, spending, or certification requires explicit authority.
Degraded mode
Fallback: if a required file, reviewer, standard source, network check, renderer, or execution capability is unavailable, return the narrowest useful qualified result and mark the affected check not assessed; never convert an unassessed check into a pass.
Decision Rules
| Choice or condition |
Action |
Failure or risk avoided |
| Two rules overlap with different outcomes or effective periods |
Escalate to the rule owner and block affected requirements until resolved. |
Contradictory automated decisions. |
| Required inputs and test oracles are complete |
Continue through the existing workflow and record evidence. |
A deliverable whose acceptance cannot be reproduced. |
| A mandatory source or owner is missing |
Stop the affected branch and issue a qualified gap record. |
Fabricated context or unauthorised decisions. |
Quality Standards
- Preserve stable identifiers and bidirectional traceability from project evidence to
Business rule catalogue and contradiction log and its acceptance checks.
- Apply ISO/IEEE measures only with a named metric, method, threshold, evidence source, and responsible reviewer; run the anti-slop gate before release.
Anti-Patterns
- Producing
Business rule catalogue and contradiction log from assumed context. Fix: cite the project source or mark the scope blocked.
- Accepting a material requirement without a deterministic oracle. Fix: add a measurable result, boundary, and verification method.
- Crossing into
requirements-patterns without routing the decision. Fix: hand off the named input and preserve trace links.
- Treating an unavailable check as passed. Fix: mark it
not assessed and state the release consequence.
- Claiming standards, statutory, or stakeholder approval without evidence. Fix: cite the source and reviewer or qualify the claim.
References
Overview
This skill isolates the domain rules that govern decisions, calculations, constraints, eligibility, timing, and compliance. It prevents rule logic from being buried inside requirements prose or code assumptions and turns it into a reviewable catalog that can drive requirements, test cases, and design controls.
When to Use
- When requirements depend on policy, eligibility, pricing, approval, compliance, or timing logic
- When multiple stakeholders describe the same rule differently
- When calculations, thresholds, or conditional decisions affect acceptance criteria
- Before formal SRS logic modeling or workflow design is finalized
Quick Reference
| Attribute |
Value |
| Inputs |
projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/elicitation_log.md, projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/business_process_models.md (recommended), projects/<ProjectName>/_context/business_rules.md (optional), vision.md |
| Output |
projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/business_rules_catalog.md |
| Tone |
Precise, policy-aware, test-oriented |
| Standards |
Wiegers & Beatty, Volere-style rule analysis |
Core Instructions
Step 1: Discover Candidate Rules
Extract candidate rules from:
- stakeholder statements
- process decisions
- compliance obligations
- calculations and thresholds
- timing or sequencing constraints
- exception handling
Step 2: Classify the Rules
Classify each rule as one of:
- policy rule
- decision rule
- calculation rule
- validation rule
- compliance rule
- temporal rule
Step 3: Normalize Each Rule
For each rule, capture:
- rule ID
- plain-language statement
- source or authority
- triggering condition
- action or expected outcome
- exception or override path
- example scenario
See references/rule-catalog-pattern.md for a normalized row structure.
Step 4: Detect Rule Problems
Flag:
- contradictory rules
- duplicate rules
- rules without a named source
- rules with no measurable fit or test condition
- rules embedded as implementation choices rather than business intent
Step 5: Map Rules Downstream
For each rule, identify its effect on:
- functional requirements
- non-functional constraints
- process controls
- test scenarios
- data model or audit needs
Step 6: Write Output
Write projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/business_rules_catalog.md with the normalized rule catalog, issue log, and downstream mapping.
Output Format
- Rule inventory summary
- Classified rule catalog
- Contradictions and gaps
- Downstream requirement and test impacts
- Open questions and source gaps
Common Pitfalls
- Mixing business policy with UI or implementation detail
- Omitting rule sources, making disputes impossible to resolve
- Recording rules without examples or exceptions
- Leaving calculations untestable or unit-less
Verification Checklist
References
references/rule-catalog-pattern.md -- Normalized business rule structure and review prompts
1---2name: 09-business-rules-analysis3description: Use when capturing and reconciling policies, calculations, eligibility, decisions, constraints, ownership, and effective dates; use requirements-patterns to express the approved behaviour structurally.4---56# Business Rules Analysis Skill78<!-- local-contract-start -->9<!-- dual-compat-start -->10## Use When1112- capturing and reconciling policies, calculations, eligibility, decisions, constraints, ownership, and effective dates; use requirements-patterns to express the approved behaviour structurally.13- Use this procedure when the required source artefacts are available and `Business rule catalogue and contradiction log` is the next lifecycle deliverable.1415## Do Not Use When1617- Use `requirements-patterns` when that neighbouring route owns the decision or deliverable.18- Do not invent missing project evidence, standards clauses, thresholds, or stakeholder decisions.1920## Required Inputs2122| Artefact | Source or provider | Required? | Behaviour when missing |23| --- | --- | --- | --- |24| Policies, process evidence, calculations, exceptions, terminology, and rule owners | Policy owners, domain experts, and elicitation evidence | Yes | Stop the affected step, name the missing source, and return only a qualified gap record. |2526## Workflow27281. Inspect the required inputs and log the exact sources, versions, and unresolved assumptions.292. Apply this skill's existing domain workflow and decision rules to produce `Business rule catalogue and contradiction log`.303. Stop when a required source, accountable decision owner, or deterministic test oracle is absent.314. Recover by preserving valid work, marking the blocked scope, and returning the narrowest qualified artefact plus the next evidence needed.3233## Outputs3435| Artefact | Consumer | Acceptance condition |36| --- | --- | --- |37| Business rule catalogue and contradiction log | Requirements, design, test, compliance, and operations | Required sections are populated, source links resolve, and every material requirement or decision has an observable review or test oracle. |3839## Evidence Produced4041| Evidence | Reviewer | Acceptance condition |42| --- | --- | --- |43| Source, decision, trace, and validation record for `Business rule catalogue and contradiction log` | Requirements quality reviewer | Inputs used, decisions made, checks run, failures, and unassessed items are explicit. |4445## Capability and permission boundaries4647Read and search are required. This procedure is read-only by default. Editing the reviewed artefact, publishing, production mutation, destructive action, spending, or certification requires explicit authority.4849## Degraded mode5051Fallback: if a required file, reviewer, standard source, network check, renderer, or execution capability is unavailable, return the narrowest useful qualified result and mark the affected check `not assessed`; never convert an unassessed check into a pass.5253## Decision Rules5455| Choice or condition | Action | Failure or risk avoided |56| --- | --- | --- |57| Two rules overlap with different outcomes or effective periods | Escalate to the rule owner and block affected requirements until resolved. | Contradictory automated decisions. |58| Required inputs and test oracles are complete | Continue through the existing workflow and record evidence. | A deliverable whose acceptance cannot be reproduced. |59| A mandatory source or owner is missing | Stop the affected branch and issue a qualified gap record. | Fabricated context or unauthorised decisions. |6061## Quality Standards6263- Preserve stable identifiers and bidirectional traceability from project evidence to `Business rule catalogue and contradiction log` and its acceptance checks.64- Apply ISO/IEEE measures only with a named metric, method, threshold, evidence source, and responsible reviewer; run the anti-slop gate before release.6566## Anti-Patterns6768- Producing `Business rule catalogue and contradiction log` from assumed context. Fix: cite the project source or mark the scope blocked.69- Accepting a material requirement without a deterministic oracle. Fix: add a measurable result, boundary, and verification method.70- Crossing into `requirements-patterns` without routing the decision. Fix: hand off the named input and preserve trace links.71- Treating an unavailable check as passed. Fix: mark it `not assessed` and state the release consequence.72- Claiming standards, statutory, or stakeholder approval without evidence. Fix: cite the source and reviewer or qualify the claim.7374## References7576- [Skill authoring and release standard](../../../../docs/skill-authoring-standard.md)77- [Rule Catalog Pattern](references/rule-catalog-pattern.md)78<!-- dual-compat-end -->79<!-- local-contract-end -->8081## Overview8283This skill isolates the domain rules that govern decisions, calculations, constraints, eligibility, timing, and compliance. It prevents rule logic from being buried inside requirements prose or code assumptions and turns it into a reviewable catalog that can drive requirements, test cases, and design controls.8485## When to Use8687- When requirements depend on policy, eligibility, pricing, approval, compliance, or timing logic88- When multiple stakeholders describe the same rule differently89- When calculations, thresholds, or conditional decisions affect acceptance criteria90- Before formal SRS logic modeling or workflow design is finalized9192## Quick Reference9394| Attribute | Value |95|-----------|-------|96| **Inputs** | `projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/elicitation_log.md`, `projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/business_process_models.md` (recommended), `projects/<ProjectName>/_context/business_rules.md` (optional), `vision.md` |97| **Output** | `projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/business_rules_catalog.md` |98| **Tone** | Precise, policy-aware, test-oriented |99| **Standards** | Wiegers & Beatty, Volere-style rule analysis |100101## Core Instructions102103### Step 1: Discover Candidate Rules104105Extract candidate rules from:106- stakeholder statements107- process decisions108- compliance obligations109- calculations and thresholds110- timing or sequencing constraints111- exception handling112113### Step 2: Classify the Rules114115Classify each rule as one of:116- policy rule117- decision rule118- calculation rule119- validation rule120- compliance rule121- temporal rule122123### Step 3: Normalize Each Rule124125For each rule, capture:126- rule ID127- plain-language statement128- source or authority129- triggering condition130- action or expected outcome131- exception or override path132- example scenario133134See `references/rule-catalog-pattern.md` for a normalized row structure.135136### Step 4: Detect Rule Problems137138Flag:139- contradictory rules140- duplicate rules141- rules without a named source142- rules with no measurable fit or test condition143- rules embedded as implementation choices rather than business intent144145### Step 5: Map Rules Downstream146147For each rule, identify its effect on:148- functional requirements149- non-functional constraints150- process controls151- test scenarios152- data model or audit needs153154### Step 6: Write Output155156Write `projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/business_rules_catalog.md` with the normalized rule catalog, issue log, and downstream mapping.157158## Output Format1591601. Rule inventory summary1612. Classified rule catalog1623. Contradictions and gaps1634. Downstream requirement and test impacts1645. Open questions and source gaps165166## Common Pitfalls167168- Mixing business policy with UI or implementation detail169- Omitting rule sources, making disputes impossible to resolve170- Recording rules without examples or exceptions171- Leaving calculations untestable or unit-less172173## Verification Checklist174175- [ ] Every rule has an ID and classification.176- [ ] Every rule has a source or is flagged as needing confirmation.177- [ ] Exceptions or overrides are documented where relevant.178- [ ] Contradictions and duplicates are identified.179- [ ] Downstream requirement and test impacts are mapped.180181## References182183- `references/rule-catalog-pattern.md` -- Normalized business rule structure and review prompts