What problem does it solve? Requirements documents often leak design-level details — framework names, data structures, CSS mechanisms — making them fragile and hard to verify. This Skill keeps individual requirements at the correct abstraction level by enforcing the WHAT (behavior) versus HOW (implementation) boundary. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Design-Leak Detection: Three self-check questions and a dangerous-vocabulary table flag framework APIs, data structures, DOM terms, and design patterns that signal design content in requirements. - Safe Sentence Patterns: Before/after rewrite examples show how to express behavior, timing, conditions, and observable quality without implementation details. - Legitimate SRS Content Guidance: Clarifies that quantitative thresholds, algorithm-as-behavior rules, external interface contracts (ARIA, JSON export), and standards like BCP 47 belong in an SRS. - Use Case: While drafting a requirement like "system passes a tabId prop via React", apply the up-one-level technique to rewrite it as "the content component shall be able to obtain its tab's identifier and activation state". ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to review this requirement for design-level leakage and rewrite it at the correct abstraction level.
