“Weeks of coding can save you hours of planning.”
– Unknown (but probably an engineer)
If you’ve been in software development long enough, you’ve probably experienced this scenario: a feature is handed off to engineering with a beautiful static design, minimal documentation, and the vague expectation that the developer will “just get it.” What’s obvious to the designer becomes obscure in the hands of someone who wasn’t part of the brainstorming sessions or user interviews. What happens next is what I call “vision interrupted”—a breakdown in communication that leads to unnecessary rework, missed expectations, and wasted time.
Behind this misalignment is often a simple but critical failure: the lack of clear, detailed requirements.
The Problem of Incomplete Requirements
Poorly written—or worse, missing—requirements are one of the most common and costly issues in software development. They lead to misunderstandings, wrong assumptions, and features that don’t meet user or stakeholder expectations. The cost of rework can be high, not just in terms of budget, but in morale, trust, and time.
Developers are not mind readers. They need more than a design mockup or a bullet point list to build a reliable, scalable, and user-friendly feature. When a handoff lacks context, detail, and clarity, it’s not just incomplete—it’s a liability.
Communication and Clarity
There’s no tool or document that can replace good communication. And while there are plenty of frameworks (user stories, acceptance criteria, design specs), none of them are effective without collaboration between designers, developers, product managers, and stakeholders.
Writing clear requirements takes time and effort. It often requires a business analyst to work closely with the client or product owner to define what “done” actually means. But that investment pays dividends. A well-documented requirement isn’t just a to-do item—it’s a contract of understanding between the people who envision the product and the people who bring it to life.
A Handoff Is Only as Good as Its Requirements
When you hand off a feature to engineering, you’re placing enormous trust in the team to interpret your vision correctly. But with vague or incomplete requirements, that trust becomes a gamble.
A strong handoff includes:
- Clear business objectives
- User goals and user flows
- Detailed acceptance criteria
- Edge cases and failure states
- Technical constraints or dependencies
Without these details, you’re asking developers to make assumptions. And assumptions are the enemy of accurate implementation.
Developers, Speak Up
It’s not just the responsibility of product managers and designers to define requirements—developers must advocate for themselves too. If you’re handed a feature with fuzzy details, don’t just start building. Ask questions. Push back. Get clarification.
A healthy development process encourages this kind of dialogue. Developers should feel empowered to say, “These requirements are not clear enough for me to estimate or build this properly.” This isn’t being difficult—it’s being professional.
Managers, Set the Stage
Project managers and team leads play a critical role in enforcing a culture of clarity. If developers are spending more time interpreting requirements than writing code, something is broken. As a manager, your job is to establish a process that values thoughtful planning and ensures that every feature has a clear path from idea to implementation.
The Cost of Getting It Wrong
When requirements are overlooked, the consequences can be severe. Entire project budgets have been burned building the wrong feature, only to realize too late that it’s not what the client wanted—or needed. At best, it results in uncomfortable conversations about scope and budget. At worst, it leads to project failure.
But these moments, as painful as they are, can be turning points. They force teams to reassess their process, improve their communication, and build a culture that values clarity over speed.
Estimation Starts After Requirements
Here’s a rule of thumb: Don’t estimate until you have detailed requirements. Estimates based on vague ideas are not just inaccurate—they’re misleading. They give stakeholders a false sense of certainty and set developers up for failure.
Instead, use a range-based estimation approach:
- Provide both low and high estimates
- Highlight areas of risk or uncertainty
- Revisit estimates after requirements are refined
This approach sets realistic expectations and encourages transparency throughout the development process.
Details Are the Real Performance Enhancers
In a world obsessed with speed and shipping fast, it’s easy to overlook the foundational role of requirements. But performance in software development doesn’t come from cutting corners—it comes from doing the right things, the right way.
Detailed requirements might slow you down at the start, but they’ll save you countless hours (and dollars) down the line. They’re not just documentation—they’re your best defense against “vision interrupted.”
So make a big deal about requirements. Push for clarity. And remember: weeks of coding might save you hours of planning—but only if you’re building the right thing in the first place.