business-analysis
Skill0 starsChanged 8 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Run an evidence-backed Business Analyst lifecycle for ambiguous business needs, product discovery, client work, process improvement, requirements, user stories, traceability, change control, UAT, and handoff. Use when a request needs stakeholder analysis, BRD-style requirements, acceptance criteria, business decisions, or measurable benefits.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- grace-method/grace-plugintheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- Douglasst102/AgentSkillstheir own version, first seen Sep 28, 2026
- tarrragon/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 1, 2026
- AbdoBasyioni/business-analysis-skilltheir own version, first seen Aug 3, 2026
- fabioc-aloha/alex-cognitive-architecturetheir own version, first seen Apr 26, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- AbdoBasyioni/business-analysis-skill★ 15same name
- Douglasst102/AgentSkills★ 4same name
- tarrragon/claude-skills★ 1same name
- fabioc-aloha/alex-cognitive-architecture★ 0same name
- grace-method/grace-plugin★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-agentsSkill
- ai-agent-workflowsSkill
- ai-native-estimationSkill
- ai-product-deliverySkill
- book-dev-engineering-loopSkill
- client-discovery-and-proposalsSkill
- content-distributionSkill
- data-engineeringSkill
- flow-videoSkill
- game-engineeringSkill
- govern-ai-skillsSkill
- graphic-designSkill
- lead-research-and-crmSkill
- main-only-developmentSkill
- product-managementSkill
- product-ownerSkill
- project-managementSkill
- qa-testingSkill
- security-and-privacySkill
- skill-templateSkill
- solo-empire-operatorSkill
- solution-architectureSkill
- subagent-orchestrationSkill
- system-docpackSkill
- unused-file-cleanupSkill
- ux-reviewSkill
- xr-engineeringSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 16
Read dashboard/CURRENT-STATE.md, docs/ARCHITECTURE.md, and docs/AI-AGENT-GUIDE.md before substantial work.
- Very specific: line 18
Read roles/business-analyst/README.md and PROCESS.md from the bookchaowalit/knowledge-base checkout (set SOLO_KNOWLEDGE_ROOT.
- Distinctive: line 54
Keep drafts, approved baselines, rejected changes, and evidence separate.
- Distinctive: line 59
Use placeholders only in templates.
- Distinctive: line 61
Keep live actions in SQLite and use Markdown for durable evidence and reusable procedures.
- Distinctive: line 66
Stop when there is no accountable owner, decision path, or usable evidence.
- Distinctive: line 67
Stop and ask for direction before sending external messages, changing production, spending money, exposing private data, or …
- Distinctive: line 71
Treat conflicting or incomplete tool results as unknowns and record them.
- Distinctive: line 72
Do not claim UAT, acceptance, benefits, or publication without evidence.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Business Analysis — Solo Empire
Overview
Turn a vague request into an approved, traceable, testable, and handoff-ready business outcome. Use the role charter and process as the governing contract; use only the artifact templates required by the bounded initiative.
Establish context
- Read dashboard/CURRENT-STATE.md, docs/ARCHITECTURE.md, and docs/AI-AGENT-GUIDE.md before substantial work.
- Read
roles/business-analyst/README.mdandPROCESS.mdfrom thebookchaowalit/knowledge-basecheckout (setSOLO_KNOWLEDGE_ROOT; default is theknowledge-basesibling of this checkout); they no longer live in this repository. - Identify the owning boundary, accountable decision maker, affected users, data classification, current status, and live task source.
- Inspect git status and preserve unrelated changes.
Lifecycle
- Intake: state the business problem, outcome, owner, scope, non-goals, and decision path. Create a concrete SQLite task for the next action.
- Discovery: use discovery-plan.md and stakeholder-map.md. Gather permitted evidence, interviews, workflows, constraints, and unanswered questions.
- Options: use business-case.md when the decision needs trade-offs, investment, risk, or benefits analysis.
- Process analysis: use as-is-to-be-process.md to model current behavior, target behavior, gaps, rules, exceptions, and controls.
- Requirements: use business-requirements.md and user-story.md. Make each priority item testable, sourced, prioritized, and owned.
- Baseline: obtain accountable approval, version the baseline, and start
requirements-traceability-matrix.md. Include the KPI definitions and
targets from
templates/sdlc/kpi-and-instrumentation-plan.md(owned byproduct-management) in the baseline; for client work the client signs them at G5 with the requirements. - Change control: never silently edit an approved baseline. Use change-request.md and decision-log.md, then update the RTM after a decision.
- UAT: use uat-plan-report.md. Distinguish smoke checks, technical tests, UAT, business acceptance, defects, waivers, and evidence.
- Handoff: use handoff-benefits-review.md. Transfer ownership, limitations, support boundaries, metrics, evidence, and the next review task. Cite KPI IDs from the KPI plan; do not define metrics again.
- Benefits follow-up: the Actual column of the benefits review cites
the latest
templates/sdlc/outcome-review.md. Each outcome-review decision that changes scope goes through change-request.md and the RTM.
Artifact rules
- Keep drafts, approved baselines, rejected changes, and evidence separate.
- Link objective → requirement → acceptance criterion → test/evidence →
release → KPI → experiment → outcome review, as in the SDLC traceability chain
(
templates/sdlc/README.md). - Record source, rationale, priority, owner, status, approver, and date.
- Use placeholders only in templates; do not leave them in an approved artifact.
- Store reusable blank starters under templates/roles/business-analyst/.
- Keep live actions in SQLite and use Markdown for durable evidence and reusable procedures.
Stop conditions and approvals
- Stop when there is no accountable owner, decision path, or usable evidence.
- Stop and ask for direction before sending external messages, changing production, spending money, exposing private data, or deleting/overwriting.
- Route legal, tax, employment, medical, or regulated questions to the proper expert; do not convert analysis into professional advice.
- Treat conflicting or incomplete tool results as unknowns and record them.
- Do not claim UAT, acceptance, benefits, or publication without evidence.
Quality gate
Before handoff, verify:
- Accountable owner approved the baseline or disposition.
- Priority requirements have acceptance criteria.
- RTM links requirements to tests/evidence.
- Changes have impact assessment and decision records.
- UAT scope, environment, tester, result, and evidence are recorded.
- Known limitations, support owner, KPI baseline, and next review exist.
- The first outcome review is scheduled (G11) and benefits cite KPI IDs.
Handoff
Report the artifacts created, baseline/version, approvals, evidence links,
open risks, unresolved assumptions, tests/UAT performed, known limitations,
and the next safe action. Run task roles:check before
declaring the role package structurally complete.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

