AgileIntermediate

User Story Quality Reviewer

Evaluate user stories using INVEST, testability, business value and Agile quality criteria.

Prompt

Act as a Senior Product Owner and Agile Business Analyst.

Review the following user story:

{{user_story}}

Acceptance criteria:

{{acceptance_criteria}}

Business context:

{{business_context}}

Known dependencies and constraints:

{{dependencies_and_constraints}}

Evaluate the user story using the INVEST framework:

1. Independent
2. Negotiable
3. Valuable
4. Estimable
5. Small
6. Testable

For every INVEST dimension, provide:

- Rating: Strong, Acceptable, Weak or Unknown
- Explanation
- Identified Issue
- Recommended Improvement

Also review:

1. User Role Clarity
2. User Goal Clarity
3. Business Benefit
4. Scope
5. Acceptance-Criteria Quality
6. Positive Scenarios
7. Negative Scenarios
8. Boundary Conditions
9. Business Rules
10. Data Requirements
11. Dependencies
12. Risks
13. Non-Functional Requirements
14. Accessibility
15. Security and Privacy
16. Definition of Ready
17. Definition of Done Considerations

Identify:

- Ambiguous language
- Technical implementation disguised as user value
- Compound requirements
- Missing business outcomes
- Missing actors
- Untestable criteria
- Hidden dependencies
- Stories that should be split
- Duplicate or overlapping scope

Do not invent business rules or technical constraints.

Return:

1. Overall Story Quality Score from 1 to 10
2. INVEST Review
3. Identified Problems
4. Clarification Questions
5. Improved User Story
6. Improved Acceptance Criteria
7. Story-Splitting Recommendation
8. Final Readiness Decision

Use one final readiness decision:

- Ready for Estimation
- Ready for Sprint Planning
- Requires Clarification
- Requires Splitting
- Requires Discovery
- Blocked

Works with ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Copilot.

Replace the highlighted variables with information about your own product, feature or business objective before using the prompt.

{{user_story}}{{acceptance_criteria}}{{business_context}}{{dependencies_and_constraints}}

Example in action

See how this prompt transforms a real input into a structured result.

Example input

User story: As a customer, I want better account management, So that I can manage my account. Acceptance criteria: - The customer can edit the profile. - The customer can change the password. - The customer can delete the account. Business context: The account-management area currently supports only viewing personal information.

Example output

Overall Quality Score: 4/10 Readiness Decision: Requires Splitting INVEST Review: Independent: Weak The story contains three separate capabilities: - Profile editing - Password change - Account deletion Small: Weak The scope is likely too large for a single story and includes different business rules and risks. Testable: Acceptable The capabilities can be tested, but the acceptance criteria lack conditions and expected outcomes. Business-Value Issue: “Manage my account” does not explain the specific customer outcome. Recommended Story Split: Story 1: As a customer, I want to update my personal information, So that my account contains current and accurate data. Story 2: As a customer, I want to change my password, So that I can maintain secure access to my account. Story 3: As a customer, I want to request account deletion, So that I can exercise control over my personal data. Open Questions: - Which profile fields are editable? - Does changing an email address require verification? - Is account deletion immediate or delayed? - Which data must be retained for legal reasons?

User Story Quality Reviewer

Example in action

Tags