pi-config/extensions/rpiv-pi/skills/discover/templates/frd.md

date, author, commit, branch, repository, topic, tags, status, last_updated, last_updated_by

date	author	commit	branch	repository	topic	tags	status	last_updated	last_updated_by
Current date and time with timezone in ISO format	User from injected git context	Current commit hash	Current branch name	Repository name	{Feature topic}	intent frd relevant-component-names	complete	Same ISO timestamp as `date:` above	User from injected git context

FRD: {Feature topic}

Summary

{2-3 sentences. The settled feature concept after the interview — what we're building, in the developer's framing.}

Problem & Intent

{What the developer is trying to solve and why. Capture the underlying motivation, not the proposed solution.}

Goals

• {Explicit goal — what success looks like}
• {Goal 2}

Non-Goals

• {Explicit exclusion — surfaced during the interview}
• {Likely scope-creep vector the developer ruled out}

Functional Requirements

1. {Numbered, independently testable. "The system SHALL …"}
2. {Requirement 2}

Non-Functional Requirements

• Performance: {latency / throughput / load expectations, or "no specific constraint"}
• Security: {auth, data handling, threat model edges}
• UX / Accessibility: {interaction model, a11y constraints}
• Reliability: {error handling expectations, retry/recovery semantics}

Constraints & Assumptions

• {Technical constraint — runtime, dependency, platform}
• {Schedule / organizational constraint}
• {Assumption being made — explicit so research can verify}

Acceptance Criteria

• {Observable pass condition a reviewer can check without reading code}
• {Criterion 2}

Recommended Approach

{1-2 sentences. The architectural shape implied by the decisions — e.g., "New command in packages/rpiv-pi/extensions/, writes JSON to stdout, no persistence layer." The downstream research skill validates this against the codebase and passes this text to scope-tracer as the topic.}

Decisions

{Decision 1 — short title}

Question: {Question as asked during the interview, or "Pre-resolved from codebase evidence"} Recommended: {The recommendation that was offered} Chosen: {What the developer picked, or the evidence-derived answer} Rationale: {1 line — why this was chosen, or evidence: path/to/file.ext:line for codebase-derived}

{Decision 2 — short title}

Question: … Recommended: … Chosen: … Rationale: …

Open Questions

{Only items the developer explicitly deferred. Each becomes an Open Question for research to answer or carry forward into Developer Context.}

• {Deferred item 1 — what's deferred, why}

References

• {Input file or ticket}
• {Related artifact, e.g., thoughts/shared/research/<YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM-SS>_<topic>.md}