simready-foundation-add-requirement

SimReady Add Requirement

Purpose

Use this skill to add one new atomic, testable requirement to an existing SimReady capability. A requirement is the smallest stable contract that features can include and validators can report.

If no existing capability fits, use simready-foundation-add-capability first. If the requirement changes behavior for an existing rule, use simready-foundation-update-requirement.

Prerequisites

Before editing, read:

• AGENTS.md
• nv_core/sr_specs/docs/guides/guides.md
• nv_core/sr_specs/docs/guides/features/features.md
• nv_core/sr_specs/docs/guides/features_expansion_workflow.md
• nv_core/sr_specs/docs/guides/naming_conventions.md
• target capability capability-*.md, requirements.md, existing requirements/*.md, and validation.py

Inputs

Collect or infer:

Instructions

Use this checklist when changing the repository:

1. Confirm the target capability exists and the requirement code is unused across all tier capability sources.
2. Create requirements/<requirement_slug>.md using the repository's requirement metadata table style: Code, Validator, Compatibility, and Tags.
3. Include Summary, Description, Why, Examples, How to comply, and relevant USD or runtime references.
4. Add valid and invalid examples that show the smallest meaningful pass/fail distinction.
5. Add the requirement filename to the capability requirements.md toctree or requirements table.
6. If the capability overview lists requirements directly, update capability-<slug>.md too.
7. If an objective rule can be implemented now, hand off to simready-foundation-add-validator.
8. If an existing or new feature should include this requirement, hand off to simready-foundation-add-feature or simready-foundation-update-feature.
9. Validate consistency:
   • requirement code is unique
   • requirement file is reachable from the capability index
   • examples align with the described rule
   • validator status is stated honestly

Examples

Example request:

Add a new atomic requirement for factory connection point direction metadata.

Expected result summary:

changed_files: new docs, manifests, indexes, or validation scaffolding
validation: focused static checks and any relevant docs/build checks
remaining_gaps: requirement, validator, adapter, profile, or runtime-test follow-up

Policies

• Requirements must be atomic. Split compound rules into separate requirement IDs.
• Do not create a requirement just to mirror a feature name; define the concrete asset rule.
• Prefer native USD concepts before custom metadata.
• Any new custom USD property or attribute named by the requirement must follow naming_conventions.md namespace rules.
• Use warnings or manual review for subjective guidance; reserve failures for objective contract violations.
• Do not list a requirement in a feature until its intended validation status is clear.

Limitations

• Do not mutate published feature or profile versions in place.
• Do not invent requirement IDs or validator behavior when the contract is ambiguous; record the question.
• Do not skip index, manifest, validation, or downstream follow-up notes.

Troubleshooting

• Error: the new concept overlaps an existing artifact. Solution: update the existing capability, requirement, feature, profile, or adapter instead.
• Error: names or IDs conflict. Solution: re-check naming conventions and nearby indexes before editing further.
• Error: validation strategy is unclear. Solution: document deferred validation and the exact follow-up skill.

Resources

• assets/openai.yaml preserves optional UI metadata for clients that read skill display hints. It is not required for the workflow.

Summary Format

Report: