.deepreview

requirement_file_format:
  description: "Validate RFC 2119 compliance, unique IDs, and sequential numbering in requirement spec files."
  match:
    include:
      - "**/*-REQ-*.md"
  review:
    strategy: individual
    instructions: |
      Review this requirements specification file for format correctness.

      Check the following:

      1. **RFC 2119 keywords**: Every requirement statement MUST use at least one
         RFC 2119 keyword (MUST, MUST NOT, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT,
         MAY, REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED, OPTIONAL). Flag any numbered requirement
         that lacks an RFC 2119 keyword — e.g., "The system generates a UUID"
         should be "The system MUST generate a UUID."

      2. **Unique requirement IDs**: Each section heading must follow the pattern
         `### {PREFIX}-REQ-NNN.M: Title` where PREFIX matches the filename prefix
         (e.g., JOBS-REQ for JOBS-REQ-001-*.md). Within each section, requirements
         are numbered lists (1., 2., 3., ...). Flag any duplicate section IDs.

      3. **Sequential numbering**: Within each section, numbered requirements
         should be sequential without gaps (1, 2, 3 — not 1, 2, 4). Flag gaps
         or out-of-order numbers.

      4. **Section ID consistency**: The section ID prefix must match the file's
         naming convention. For example, in `JOBS-REQ-001-mcp-workflow-tools.md`,
         all sections should use `JOBS-REQ-001.X` (not `JOBS-REQ-002.X`).

      5. **Testability**: Each requirement should be specific enough to be
         verifiable — either by an automated test or a review rule. Flag vague
         requirements that cannot be objectively evaluated (e.g., "The system
         SHOULD be fast" — fast compared to what?).

      Output Format:
      - PASS: All requirements are properly formatted.
      - FAIL: Issues found. List each with the section ID, requirement number,
        and a concise description of the issue.