haiku-method 2.2.0

package/studios/vendor-management/stages/requirements/hats/verifier.md

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+**Focus:** Validate the per-unit knowledge artifact for the requirements stage of vendor-management. Units here are requirement element — knowledge artifacts that downstream stages consume. Validation rules check substance, citation, internal consistency, and decision-register accountability. NOT executable verify-commands or DAG validity (workflow engine/build-stage concerns).
+
+**Anti-patterns (RFC 2119):**
+- The agent **MUST NOT** read or interpret unit frontmatter for any mechanical purpose. workflow engine territory per architecture §1.1.
+- The agent **MUST NOT** validate against frontmatter schema, `depends_on:` resolution, status-field shape, or any other FM-driven check — those are workflow engine responsibilities.
+- The agent **MUST NOT** advance a unit whose body is a placeholder, contains TODO markers, or has empty sections.
+- The agent **MUST NOT** reject for stylistic preferences. Substantive gaps only.
+- The agent **MUST** name a specific failed criterion in any rejection.
+- The agent **MUST NOT** invent rules not in this mandate. Stage scope is the contract.
+
+## What you check (BODY ONLY)
+
+### 1. Artifact answers its topic
+The unit's title and first paragraph define the topic. The remaining body MUST deliver substantive content on that topic. Reject placeholders, content-free outlines, or redirects.
+
+### 2. Sources cited
+Non-trivial claims (numbers, market signals, system behavior, stakeholder positions) MUST cite specific sources — URL, doc path, dated stakeholder conversation, named standard. Reject "industry common knowledge" or unsourced numerical claims.
+
+### 3. Internal consistency
+Title, mission, and body must align. Numerical/categorical claims must be consistent across the body. Recommendations must follow from the evidence presented.
+
+### 4. Decision-register consistency
+The unit must not propose, default to, or assume an option that contradicts a recorded Decision. Cite the Decision ID in any rejection.
+
+### 5. Open questions accounted for
+Every "Open Questions" entry must be answered, defaulted with veto-style approval, OR flagged `(needs human escalation)`.

package/studios/vendor-management/stages/requirements/outputs/RFP-DOCUMENT.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+name: rfp-document
+location: .haiku/intents/{intent-slug}/stages/requirements/artifacts/
+scope: intent
+format: text
+required: true
+---
+
+# RFP Document
+
+Procurement requirements with evaluation criteria, weights, and submission guidelines.
+
+## Expected Artifacts
+
+- **Requirements** -- categorized as mandatory, preferred, and nice-to-have with business justification
+- **Evaluation criteria** -- weighted criteria with scoring methodology defined before vendor contact
+- **Technical specifications** -- integration requirements, data formats, and SLA expectations
+- **Submission guidelines** -- format, deadline, and evaluation process communicated to vendors
+
+## Quality Signals
+
+- Requirements are categorized with business justification for each mandatory item
+- Evaluation criteria have weights defined before any vendor contact
+- Technical requirements are specific enough for objective vendor comparison
+- Requirements are validated against business needs

package/studios/vendor-management/stages/requirements/phases/ELABORATION.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+# Requirements Stage — Elaboration
+
+## Criteria Guidance
+
+### Good criteria — concrete and verifiable
+
+- "RFP document includes weighted evaluation criteria with scoring methodology defined before vendor contact"
+- "Requirements are categorized as mandatory, preferred, and nice-to-have with business justification for each mandatory item"
+- "Technical requirements include integration specifications, data format requirements, and SLA expectations"
+
+### Bad criteria — vague (no clear check)
+
+- "Requirements are defined"
+- "RFP is written"
+- "Needs are documented"
+

package/studios/vendor-management/stages/requirements/review-agents/specificity.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+interpretation: lens
+---
+**Mandate:** The agent **MUST** verify requirements are specific enough for objective vendor evaluation.
+
+**Check:**
+- The agent **MUST** verify that requirements are categorized by priority with business justification
+- The agent **MUST** verify that technical specifications are precise enough to enable objective comparison
+- The agent **MUST** verify that evaluation criteria and scoring methodology are defined before vendor contact
+- The agent **MUST** verify that sLA expectations include measurable thresholds, not just descriptive language