• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Begin with the reason this software should exist, not a list of screens. Who will use it day to day, how many times a day, and what happens today? An estimator who grasps the purpose can propose a simpler way to reach it; a team that receives only a list of screens can only price the list as written.

Describe the scope as short scenarios: affiliate software development company who does what, and what happens next. Every bit as useful, write down what the first release deliberately excludes. An explicit exclusion list saves more friction during acceptance than any other single page. Mark too which items are decided and which may still change — estimators price uncertainty, and concealing the open questions helps nobody.

Set out your constraints. This means the platforms and services involved, the data you have and where it lives, compliance requirements, traffic expectations, supported browsers or devices and stacks you cannot change. Where a date is genuinely fixed price vs time and materials, say why: a team can often resequence the work to protect it, but only if they know it exists.

Say what the word done means for the important items. Testable acceptance criteria do not need special syntax: a short list stating what must be true when the feature works is sufficient. This single habit reduces acceptance testing considerably and closes off the most common source of disputes.

Finally, ask for a specific format. Ask for a breakdown by feature or module, a written list of assumptions, whatever the team considers risky and an optimistic and a pessimistic figure. Treat a wide range as information, not evasion: it normally identifies the part of the brief that needs work. From there rewrite that part and ask again — the revised figure will be much more reliable.