• Requirement documents are incomplete, ambiguous, or frequently changing.
• Team asks QA to identify risk before test case implementation.
• You must decide what can be tested now vs. what needs clarification.

• Produce a requirement-level risk and testability assessment.
• Output clarified scope, dependency list, and verification strategy.
• Turn unclear requirements into actionable QA questions and decisions.

1. Decompose requirement into business rules, state transitions, and exception handling.
2. Mark ambiguity: missing inputs, unclear outcomes, or conflicting logic.
3. Map requirement to test dimensions: functional, data, interface, workflow, non-functional.
4. Prioritize by user impact and change volatility.
5. Create clarification questions with expected decision owner.
6. Finalize analysis report with recommended next QA actions.

Input:

• PRD: discount rules + tiered membership + refund exception

Output:

• Rule matrix with explicit boundaries
• High-risk list (rounding, overlap rules, rollback behavior)
• Clarification checklist and proposed acceptance criteria

Input:

• "Read PRD and give me test points"

Output (problem):

• Generic test points without requirement conflict detection
• No unresolved-question tracking

• Do not assume missing business rules as fixed truth.
• Do not jump to case writing before ambiguity triage.
• Do not ignore upstream/downstream dependency impact.
• Do not output risk ranking without rationale.
• Do not claim requirement is testable when acceptance criteria are absent.