The requirement describes an event-driven response: a specific day (Friday) acts as the trigger for the system action. The ‘WHEN ‘ template is the standard EARS structure for such event-triggered requirements, making the requirement clear, testable, and unambiguous.

Good requirements should be atomic, unambiguous, and testable. The stakeholder’s statement contains a trigger (scanning), a primary response (showing allergies), and a precondition (authorization). Separating these concerns into distinct, well-structured requirements (e.g., using templates like ‘WHEN IF the shall ‘) reduces risk, improves understanding, and facilitates verification.

A core part of requirements engineering is managing stakeholder expectations and project constraints. Documenting a high-value, high-risk requirement like this is crucial. It formally captures the stakeholder need, provides a basis for analyzing its impact (cost, risk, value), and is essential for structured negotiations about project scope, priorities, and potential phasing of features.

Requirements must be verifiable (testable). ‘User-friendly’ is a subjective quality attribute (a non-functional requirement) that provides no objective basis for acceptance. It should be refined into measurable criteria, such as ‘A new user shall be able to complete the initial configuration with no more than two calls to the help desk,’ or ‘90% of surveyed users shall rate the interface ease-of-use as 4 or higher on a 5-point scale.’

The requirement is highly unambiguous (clear trigger condition: weight > 1000 kg, clear responses: doors open, alarm sounds). It is also easily verifiable/testable: a test can be designed to place 1001 kg in the car and check for the specified system behavior. While it may also be feasible and understandable, its precision makes unambiguity and verifiability its most prominent quality attributes.

Inconsistencies in elicited information are common and a key reason for facilitated workshops. Bringing conflicting stakeholders together with a neutral facilitator (the RE) allows for the direct confrontation and discussion of discrepancies. This collaborative technique helps uncover hidden assumptions, clarify root causes, and converge on a single, validated understanding of the business process, which is far more effective and sustainable than imposing a solution based on authority.

The classic user story format ‘As a [role], I want [feature], so that [benefit]’ is designed to keep the focus on user value. The ‘so that’ clause captures the purpose, the reason why the user needs the functionality. Understanding this underlying rationale is crucial for making good design decisions, prioritizing features, and ensuring the delivered solution truly meets the user’s goal, not just implements a function.

A Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) establishes and maintains relationships between requirements (e.g., business requirements to user requirements to system requirements) and often links them to design elements, test cases, and other artifacts. Its primary purpose is to allow the impact of changes to be assessed and to understand the derivation of any given requirement, exactly as the architect needs to do.

Validation is about ensuring we are building the *right* system. While traceability, precision, and tooling are important, direct engagement with users/stakeholders is key for validation. A walkthrough where the growers are asked ‘what if’ scenarios (e.g., ‘What if it’s 71% for 5 minutes?’, ‘Is this range for seedlings or mature plants?’, ‘What happens during a power failure?’) is an excellent technique to reveal assumptions, edge cases, and potential misunderstandings that pure documentation review might miss.

The requirement describes an event-driven response: a specific day (Friday) acts as the trigger for the system action. The ‘WHEN ‘ template is the standard EARS structure for such event-triggered requirements, making the requirement clear, testable, and unambiguous.0