agentleFS
Sign inStart free
jabrenajabrena/cursor-rules-java/skills/025-quality-attribute-discovery/SKILL.md

025-quality-attribute-discovery

Skill452 starsChanged 3 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use when a problem under exploration needs its quality attributes (non-functional requirements) identified and prioritized before architecture and design begin. This should trigger when an issue's Quality Attribute Discovery point of view needs evaluation, or when a maintainer directly asks to discover and prioritize candidate quality attributes for a problem, before any ADR or design work starts. Part of Plinth Toolkit

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Very specific:

    MUST: read references/025-quality-attribute-discovery.md before applying Quality Attribute Discovery guidance

    line 25
  2. Distinctive:

    MUST: stop at a prioritized discovery list without selecting or recording an architecture decision

    line 28
  3. Very specific:

    Read references/025-quality-attribute-discovery.md, then review the problem frame, root-cause findings, assumptions, and context map for …

    line 44
  4. Distinctive:

    Stop at the prioritized discovery list.

    line 56

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Quality Attribute Discovery

Guide identification and prioritization of the quality attributes a future solution must satisfy, before architecture and design decisions begin. This is an interactive SKILL.

What is covered in this Skill?

  • Identifying candidate quality attributes (for example performance, security, availability, maintainability, scalability, usability, observability) relevant to the problem
  • Grounding each candidate in evidence from the problem frame, root causes, assumptions, and context map, not a generic checklist
  • Prioritizing candidate quality attributes by stakeholder impact and risk
  • Stopping at a prioritized discovery list rather than selecting or recording an architectural decision
  • Explicitly not producing ADRs or an architecture direction itself

Constraints

Discover and prioritize candidate quality attributes as input to later architecture work; do not make or record the architecture decision here. When this technique is orchestrated by another workflow, the orchestrator owns clarifying-question sequencing; when applied standalone, ask directly.

  • MUST read references/025-quality-attribute-discovery.md before applying Quality Attribute Discovery guidance
  • MUST ground each candidate quality attribute in evidence from the problem frame, root causes, assumptions, or context map
  • MUST prioritize candidate quality attributes by stakeholder impact and risk, not list them unordered
  • MUST stop at a prioritized discovery list without selecting or recording an architecture decision
  • MUST NOT record an architectural decision, ADR, or design direction as part of this skill's output
  • MUST NOT invent a quality attribute or priority when the available content is vague or ambiguous; flag the gap for a clarifying question instead

When to use this skill

  • Discover the quality attributes for this problem
  • Identify non-functional requirements before design begins
  • Prioritize candidate quality attributes for this issue
  • Apply quality attribute discovery before architecture decisions
  • Draft the Quality Attribute Discovery section of a Functional Specification

Workflow

  1. Read the Reference

Read references/025-quality-attribute-discovery.md, then review the problem frame, root-cause findings, assumptions, and context map for evidence of quality pressure.

  1. Identify Candidate Quality Attributes

Identify candidate quality attributes grounded in that evidence, avoiding a generic unfiltered checklist.

  1. Prioritize by Impact and Risk

Prioritize the candidate quality attributes by stakeholder impact and risk if unmet.

  1. Stop Before Architecture Decisions

Stop at the prioritized discovery list; do not select an architecture approach or record an ADR here.

  1. Report the Discovery List

Report the prioritized quality attributes, stating explicitly that the output stops at this discovery list and does not select or record an architecture decision; flag any item left open pending a clarifying answer.

Reference

For detailed guidance, examples, and constraints, see references/025-quality-attribute-discovery.md.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free