Most business requirement docs fail for one reason:
They are written to look complete, not to be used.
If engineers have to ask questions after reading it, the doc failed.
This post is a practical checklist + template to fix that.
No theory. No fluff.
What a “working” BRD actually means
A business requirement doc works if:
- a developer can start building without guessing
- a designer understands what to design
- no one needs a meeting to clarify basics
If that does not happen, the doc is just documentation, not a tool.
The 5-part BRD sections (minimum viable structure)
Do not overcomplicate this.
A working BRD only needs 5 parts:
| Section | What it answers | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Problem | What is broken | Users drop off during checkout |
| Goal | What success looks like | Reduce checkout time to 2 minutes |
| Scope | What is included | Checkout flow only |
| Requirements | What must be true | One-click payment |
| Constraints | Limits | Must work on mobile |
If any section is missing, confusion starts.
If any section is too long, confusion also starts.
How to write BRD (checklist)
Use this as a write BRD checklist.
Step 1: Define the problem (1–2 lines max)
Bad:
- Users face multiple issues during authentication flow
Good:
- Users forget passwords and cannot log in
Step 2: Define success (measurable)
Bad:
- Improve login experience
Good:
- Reduce failed login attempts by 50 percent
Step 3: Write requirements (clear and testable)
Bad:
- System should be user friendly
Good:
- Users can reset password via email in under one minute
Step 4: Add scope (what is NOT included)
Example:
- Included: login and password reset
- Not included: signup redesign
This prevents scope creep.
Scope creep means extra work sneaks in later.
Step 5: Add constraints (real limits)
Examples:
- Must work on mobile
- Must load under 2 seconds
- Must use existing API
Step 6: Run the 60-second test
Ask:
Can someone read this and explain it in 1 minute?
- Yes → done
- No → simplify
Requirement mapping (turn words into buildable work)
This is where most BRDs fail.
A requirement must connect to a feature.
Simple mapping format
Need → Feature
Example
Need: Faster checkout
Feature: One-click payment
Need: Users forget passwords
Feature: Email password reset
Why this matters
Without mapping:
- requirements stay abstract
- engineers guess implementation
- output varies
With mapping:
- each requirement becomes buildable
- testing becomes easier
- alignment improves
Example: Build-ready BRD (copy template)
Use this as a base.
Problem:
Users cannot log in because they forget passwords
Goal:
Users regain access in under 1 minute
Scope:
Included: login, password reset
Not included: signup flow
Requirements:
- Users can request password reset via email
- Reset process completes in under 60 seconds
- User receives confirmation message
Constraints:
- Must work on mobile
- Must use existing auth system
If a doc looks like this, it is ready.
Prioritize requirements (avoid overload)
Not everything should be built at once.
Use this simple priority system:
| Priority | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Must | Product breaks without it |
| Should | Important but not critical |
| Could | Nice to have |
| Wont | Not now |
Example
- Must: secure login
- Should: social login
- Could: theme customization
Rule
If everything is important, nothing is.
Common BRD mistakes (and quick fixes)
Mistake 1: Too much detail
Problem:
- Long explanations nobody reads
Fix:
- Keep each section under 3–4 lines
Mistake 2: Vague requirements
Problem:
- Cannot test or build
Fix:
- Make every requirement measurable
Mistake 3: No scope boundaries
Problem:
- Work keeps expanding
Fix:
- Always define what is NOT included
Mistake 4: No requirement mapping
Problem:
- Engineers guess implementation
Fix:
- Map every need to a feature
Mistake 5: Written for approval, not execution
Problem:
- Looks good but not usable
Fix:
- Optimize for clarity, not completeness
Quick review checklist (before sharing)
Run this before sending your BRD:
- Problem is clear in 1–2 lines
- Goal is measurable
- Requirements are testable
- Scope is defined
- Constraints are listed
- Each requirement maps to a feature
- Someone can explain it in 60 seconds
If all are true, the doc is usable.
Final takeaway
A business requirement doc is not about writing more.
It is about removing confusion.
- Clear > detailed
- Simple > impressive
- Buildable > complete
Want the full breakdown?
This post covers the execution side.
The full guide includes:
- deeper examples
- expanded sections
- additional scenarios
