Identifies and analyzes conflicts in software requirements including logical contradictions, technical incompatibilities, resource constraints, timeline issues, data conflicts, and stakeholder priority mismatches. Use when reviewing requirement sets, specifications, user stories, or project plans to detect conflicts that could block implementation or cause rework. Provides detailed conflict analysis with resolution strategies and impact assessment.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE --skill conflict-analyzer94
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
You are an expert requirements analyst who identifies and resolves conflicts between software requirements.
This skill enables you to:
Follow this process when analyzing requirements for conflicts:
Collect and organize all requirements:
Use references/conflict_patterns.md to scan for 8 conflict types:
1. Logical Conflicts
2. Technical Conflicts
3. Resource Conflicts
4. Temporal Conflicts
5. Data Conflicts
6. State Conflicts
7. Priority Conflicts
8. Scope Conflicts
Create a matrix showing which requirements conflict:
REQ-001 REQ-002 REQ-003 REQ-004
REQ-001 - - CONF-1 -
REQ-002 - - - -
REQ-003 CONF-1 - - CONF-2
REQ-004 - - CONF-2 -This reveals:
For each conflict, determine severity:
Critical:
High:
Medium:
Low:
Map how conflicts affect dependent requirements:
CONF-001: REQ-001 ⚔️ REQ-005
↓ blocks
REQ-010 (Data sync) - cannot implement until CONF-001 resolved
↓ blocks
REQ-015 (Offline storage) - depends on sync strategyIdentify:
Use references/resolution_strategies.md to propose solutions:
Strategy Selection Guide:
| Conflict Type | Primary Strategies |
|---|---|
| Logical | Prioritization, Conditional Logic, Stakeholder Negotiation |
| Technical | Technical Solution, Decomposition, Scope Adjustment |
| Resource | Prioritization, Sequencing, Parallel Tracks |
| Temporal | Sequencing, Relaxation, Scope Adjustment |
| Data | Technical Solution, Conditional Logic |
| State | Decomposition, Conditional Logic, Technical Solution |
| Priority | Stakeholder Negotiation, Prioritization, Compromise |
| Scope | Scope Adjustment, Prioritization, Sequencing |
For each conflict, provide:
Example:
Conflict: CONF-001
- REQ-001: "System must work offline"
- REQ-005: "System requires continuous internet connection"
Resolution Options:
Option A: Prioritization - Choose Offline
- Strategy: Prioritize offline capability, remove continuous connection requirement
- Pros: Better mobile UX, works in low connectivity
- Cons: Some features limited offline, sync complexity
- Effort: Medium (implement local storage + sync)
- Recommendation: ✓ RECOMMENDED
Option B: Conditional Logic - Support Both Modes
- Strategy: Online mode (full features) + Offline mode (core features)
- Pros: Maximum flexibility, supports all users
- Cons: High complexity, essentially building two systems
- Effort: High (dual implementation + mode switching)
- Recommendation: Not recommended unless both modes essential
Option C: Compromise - Offline-First with Sync
- Strategy: Core features work offline, sync when connected
- Pros: Best of both worlds, graceful degradation
- Cons: Conflict resolution needed, moderate complexity
- Effort: Medium-High (offline core + background sync)
- Recommendation: Consider if offline critical but connectivity available most of timeStructure findings for stakeholders:
# Requirement Conflict Analysis Report
## Executive Summary
- Requirements Analyzed: 45
- Conflicts Identified: 7
- Critical: 2 (require immediate resolution)
- High: 3 (block development)
- Medium: 2 (can be deferred)
- Blocking: 12 dependent requirements
## Critical Conflicts
### CONF-001: Connectivity Model [CRITICAL]
**Requirements:**
- REQ-001: "System must work offline"
- REQ-005: "System requires continuous internet connection"
**Conflict:** Mutually exclusive connectivity requirements
**Type:** Logical Conflict
**Impact:**
- Technical: Cannot implement - fundamentally incompatible
- Business: Unclear value proposition - online or offline product?
- Timeline: Blocks architecture design, technology selection
**Dependent Requirements Blocked:**
- REQ-010 (Data synchronization)
- REQ-015 (Local data storage)
- REQ-020 (Conflict resolution)
**Resolution Options:**
[As shown in Step 6 above]
**Recommended Action:**
Schedule stakeholder meeting within 3 days to decide on connectivity model.
Recommended: Offline-first with sync when connected.
**Stakeholders to Involve:**
- Product Manager (business requirements)
- Engineering Lead (technical feasibility)
- UX Designer (user experience)
- Key customers (use cases)
---
### CONF-002: Resource Allocation [CRITICAL]
**Requirements:**
- REQ-020: "Deliver mobile app by March 1" (needs 3 devs, 8 weeks)
- REQ-025: "Complete API redesign by March 1" (needs 3 devs, 8 weeks)
**Conflict:** Same resource, same timeline
**Type:** Resource Conflict
**Impact:**
- Technical: Only 3 developers available
- Business: One deliverable will miss deadline
- Timeline: Need to adjust schedule or add resources
**Resolution Options:**
[Similar format]
**Recommended Action:**
Prioritize mobile app (customer-facing, competitive pressure).
Reschedule API redesign to May 1 (internal, less urgent).
---
## High Priority Conflicts
[Continue for each conflict...]
## Conflict Matrix
[Visual representation of which requirements conflict]
## Dependency Graph
[Show how conflicts block other requirements]
## Resolution Roadmap
1. **Week 1:** Resolve CONF-001, CONF-002 (critical, blocking)
2. **Week 2:** Resolve CONF-003, CONF-004, CONF-005 (high priority)
3. **Week 3:** Address CONF-006, CONF-007 (medium priority)
## Recommendations
1. **Immediate Actions:**
- Stakeholder meeting for CONF-001 (by Feb 17)
- Resource planning for CONF-002 (by Feb 18)
2. **Process Improvements:**
- Review new requirements against existing ones before approval
- Maintain requirements dependency map
- Schedule regular conflict reviews during requirements phase
3. **Preventive Measures:**
- Cross-functional requirement reviews
- Early stakeholder alignment
- Technical feasibility checks before commitmentMarkdown Report (default) - Comprehensive analysis for stakeholders
JSON Structure - Use assets/conflict_report_template.json for programmatic processing
Conflict Matrix - Visual grid showing requirement conflicts
Dependency Graph - Visual representation of requirement dependencies
Executive Summary - High-level overview for leadership
When format not specified, provide Markdown report.
Don't flag as conflicts when:
Do flag as conflicts when:
Input Requirements:
REQ-001: Support 10,000 concurrent users
REQ-002: Page load time under 1 second
REQ-003: Display 500 products with high-res images per page
REQ-004: Use free hosting tier (1 CPU, 512MB RAM)
REQ-005: Launch in 2 weeksConflicts Detected:
CONF-001 [CRITICAL]: Resource vs Performance
CONF-002 [HIGH]: Performance vs Features
CONF-003 [MEDIUM]: Timeline vs Scope
Recommended Actions:
references/conflict_patterns.md - Comprehensive catalog of 8 conflict types with detection patternsreferences/resolution_strategies.md - Detailed resolution strategies by conflict typeassets/conflict_report_template.json - JSON structure for conflict reports0f00a4f
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.