requirements-traceability-matrix
Requirements Traceability Matrix
Use this skill when the user needs a durable mapping from requirement to implementation evidence.
This skill exists to prevent dropped requirements, vague coverage claims, and spec drift during planning, implementation, and review.
When to use
Use this skill for prompts like:
- "Build a traceability matrix"
- "Show me which requirements are covered"
- "Map the spec to code and tests"
- "Prove the implementation covers the requirements"
- "Find gaps between the requirements and the artifacts"
Use it whenever coverage must be auditable rather than implied.
Required workflow
- Extract each requirement as a discrete traceable statement.
- Assign stable identifiers so distinct requirements do not get merged accidentally.
- Map each requirement to implementation artifacts, tests, docs, and validation evidence.
- Mark each requirement as covered, partial, missing, superseded, or out of scope.
- Surface gaps, contradictions, and unverified assumptions explicitly.
- Preserve superseded requirements instead of erasing them.
- Update the matrix when requirements change so history stays visible.
Non-negotiable rules
- Do not invent coverage.
- Do not merge multiple requirements into one row when the distinction matters.
- Do not drop superseded requirements from the trace.
- Do not mark a requirement covered unless the evidence is concrete.
- Do not rely on a vague summary when the user asked for a matrix.
- Do not hide missing validation behind implementation-only evidence.
Matrix expectations
Each row should, at minimum, capture:
- requirement ID
- source location or provenance
- coverage status
- implementation evidence
- validation evidence
- remaining gap or note
If a requirement is only partially satisfied, say what is missing and whether it is blocking.
Definition of done
This skill is complete only when all of the following are true:
- every requirement in scope appears in the matrix
- every status is backed by evidence or a clear gap note
- contradictions and partial coverage are called out
- the result is usable by a reviewer without reconstruction
Final output contract
Report all of the following:
- the requirement list you traced
- the matrix itself or a compact equivalent
- uncovered or partially covered items
- superseded requirements that were preserved
- any assumptions that were intentionally resolved
If the user asked for a proof of coverage, make the gaps impossible to miss.
More from mwillbanks/agent-skills
code-discipline
Prevent trivial helpers, wrapper layers, rename-only utilities, duplicate constants, and local reinvention. Enforce reuse of platform primitives, framework capabilities, shared utilities, and proven libraries. Use when adding or reviewing logic, constants, composition, or UI structure so the agent keeps code disciplined and avoids technical debt.
31agent-execution-mode
Enforces complete execution, repository-aware spec-driven delivery, mode-aware delivery, compact sub-agent communication, independent agent-review gating, validation, and reporting for implementation, bugfix, hardening, documentation, specification, architecture, design, review, and post-mortem tasks. Use whenever work must be completed, reviewed, validated, or documented through an explicit execution mode instead of handled ad hoc.
28repo-standards-enforcement
Use this skill to enforce repository-wide standards for toolchain compliance, package-manager purity, type safety, testing, maintainability, and architecture. When a more specific skill exists for a concern such as final linting or formatting remediation, that more specific skill takes precedence over this skill's generalized guidance.
26biome-enforcement
Use this skill when a task touches code, tests, Biome config, or generated artifacts and Biome must remain the final remediation and enforcement pass using the required JSON changed-files command.
24execution-alignment-gate
Detects materially ambiguous or under-specified requests, selects the right clarification target, and enforces bounded alignment before execution, including spec-governed continuations and approval-gated manager handoffs. Use when ambiguity could cause wrong deliverables, wrong scope, wrong implementation path, avoidable rework, or token waste from repeated follow-up.
19speckit-feature-orchestrator
Orchestrates a full Speckit feature workflow from constitution amendment through specification, clarification, plan, tasks, and analysis as a chief-architect governor using subagents. Use when the repository already uses Speckit or the user explicitly asks for Speckit and wants to discuss, refine, or directly drive a new feature into implementation-ready Speckit artifacts in one controlled pass.
12