Arc Skills / Verification and validation

Identify requirements without verification coverage

Arc Skills reviews requirement-to-Test links alongside actual Runs and article identity. It returns a count-reconciled coverage register with the smallest next action for each gap class.

Use this skill

Use Arc Skills to identify verification gaps in the supplied requirement baseline.

Inputs:
- All in-scope requirement IDs, revisions, clauses, and exclusion rules
- Linked Tests, procedures, criteria, and Test Plan slots
- Current Runs or reports with article configuration and applicability evidence

Return a per-requirement coverage register and reconciled totals by gap class.
Distinguish missing plan, unrun test, stale evidence, failed result, and current demonstration

Set up the toolkit · Read the skill instructions

What you provide and what you get

Inputs and outputs
What you have	How it is used	What you get
Requirement baseline	Defines all in-scope obligations and denominator	Reconciled register
Tests and plan	Shows intended method and steps	Planning or execution gap
Runs and configuration	Establishes current results and applicability	Demonstrated or stale verdict

Four different coverage states

Illustrative engineering example.

Four requirements are in scope on article revision B. R-1 has no Test; R-2 has an unrun Test; R-3 has a pass on revision A; R-4 has a current pass on B.

R-1: no verifies link.
R-2: T-2 linked, procedure complete, no Run.
R-3: T-3 linked, Run E-3 Pass on article A; target is B.
R-4: T-4 linked, Run E-4 Pass on article B; full clause covered.

Four different coverage states — illustrative output
Requirement	Gap class / evidence	Smallest next action
R-1	Planning gap; no Test	Select method and author a Test.
R-2	Execution gap; T-2 planned but not run	Execute on current article and assess result.
R-3	Applicability gap; E-3 Pass on old article A	Review A→B delta or rerun affected test.
R-4	Currently demonstrated; E-4 on B	Retain evidence locator and monitor later changes.

The denominator is four requirements: one planning gap, one execution gap, one applicability gap, and one presently demonstrated. Calling the first three simply “unverified” would obscure different remedies.

R-3 is not automatically invalid; a controlled similarity argument may establish applicability. Likewise R-4 is demonstrated only for the stated clause, baseline, and configuration.

Follow the evidence chain

Include every requirement in the named baseline, even with no links.
Check each Test objective, criterion, and planned slot for full clause coverage.
Inspect executed results, article identity, and current applicability.
Count distinct gap classes and state one closure action per row.

Questions about this task

Is a verifies relationship sufficient coverage?

It establishes intended scope, not an executed pass or suitable conditions.

Can old evidence still be useful?

Yes. Compare affected design and requirement changes, then document an applicability argument or targeted rerun.

Sources and further reading

NASA Systems Engineering Handbook: Lifecycle and requirements guidance; the example decisions are illustrative.