The URS module
A user requirements specification fails review for predictable reasons: requirements that cannot be verified, assumptions presented as facts, and categories quietly left out. The URS module is built around those three failures.
See where the URS sits in the full document lifecycle
Assumptions are first-class
When you cannot confirm something, such as a utility rating, an interface or a site standard, you record it as an open assumption attached to the document. Open assumptions are counted on your dashboard and printed in their own section of the export, so nothing is issued while it is still a guess.
Two ways in, one structure
Start from structured questions, or paste a vendor specification and turn its lines into candidate requirements you accept, edit or discard. Either route produces the same categorised document.
- Operational
- Functional
- Data / records
- Data integrity (ALCOA+)
- Security and access control
- Audit trail
- Interfaces
- Environmental / utilities
- Materials of construction
- Cleaning and maintenance
- Safety
- Documentation and handover
- Regulatory compliance
- Qualification support
How generated content is controlled
The model is not trusted to police itself. A vendor PDF is read in two separate passes: the first returns only facts with a page number and a verbatim quote, the second writes requirements from that fact list alone. Each quote is then checked by plain string matching against the extracted text. A quote that is not found there means the requirement is recorded as an assumption, with its page reference removed.
Values that are not in the source are written as [TO BE CONFIRMED] rather than guessed, clause references are checked against a stored list of valid clauses, and numbers with no traceable origin are flagged. A document cannot be approved while any requirement is unverified or any placeholder remains. Human review and approval is still required.
What it does not do
It does not assess your compliance, approve your document, or replace your site's quality system. It does not claim the model never invents content. It produces a draft that a competent reviewer can work with, traces every statement to a source or an assumption, and keeps the unresolved parts visible.