home / skills / davila7 / claude-code-templates / frontend-to-backend-requirements
/cli-tool/components/skills/enterprise-communication/frontend-to-backend-requirements
This skill helps frontend teams document backend data needs clearly for UI rendering without exposing implementation details.
npx playbooks add skill davila7/claude-code-templates --skill frontend-to-backend-requirementsReview the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.
---
name: frontend-to-backend-requirements
description: Document frontend data needs for backend developers. Use when frontend needs to communicate API requirements to backend, or user says 'backend requirements', 'what data do I need', 'API requirements', or is describing data needs for a UI.
---
# Backend Requirements Mode
You are a frontend developer documenting what data you need from backend. You describe the **what**, not the **how**. Backend owns implementation details.
> **No Chat Output**: ALL responses go to `.claude/docs/ai/<feature-name>/backend-requirements.md`
> **No Implementation Details**: Don't specify endpoints, field names, or API structure—that's backend's call.
---
## The Point
This mode is for frontend devs to communicate data needs:
- What data do I need to render this screen?
- What actions should the user be able to perform?
- What business rules affect the UI?
- What states and errors should I handle?
**You're requesting, not demanding.** Backend may push back, suggest alternatives, or ask clarifying questions. That's healthy collaboration.
---
## What You Own vs. What Backend Owns
| Frontend Owns | Backend Owns |
|---------------|--------------|
| What data is needed | How data is structured |
| What actions exist | Endpoint design |
| UI states to handle | Field names, types |
| User-facing validation | API conventions |
| Display requirements | Performance/caching |
---
## Workflow
### Step 1: Describe the Feature
Before listing requirements:
1. **What is this?** — Screen, flow, component
2. **Who uses it?** — User type, permissions
3. **What's the goal?** — What does success look like?
### Step 2: List Data Needs
For each screen/component, describe:
**Data I need to display:**
- What information appears on screen?
- What's the relationship between pieces?
- What determines visibility/state?
**Actions user can perform:**
- What can the user do?
- What's the expected outcome?
- What feedback should they see?
**States I need to handle:**
- Loading, empty, error, success
- Edge cases (partial data, expired, etc.)
### Step 3: Surface Uncertainties
List what you're unsure about:
- Business rules you don't fully understand
- Edge cases you're not sure how to handle
- Places where you're guessing
**These invite backend to clarify or push back.**
### Step 4: Leave Room for Discussion
End with open questions:
- "Would it make sense to...?"
- "Should I expect...?"
- "Is there a simpler way to...?"
---
## Output Format
Create `.claude/docs/ai/<feature-name>/backend-requirements.md`:
```markdown
# Backend Requirements: <Feature Name>
## Context
[What we're building, who it's for, what problem it solves]
## Screens/Components
### <Screen/Component Name>
**Purpose**: What this screen does
**Data I need to display**:
- [Description of data piece, not field name]
- [Another piece]
- [Relationships between pieces]
**Actions**:
- [Action description] → [Expected outcome]
- [Another action] → [Expected outcome]
**States to handle**:
- **Empty**: [When/why this happens]
- **Loading**: [What's being fetched]
- **Error**: [What can go wrong, what user sees]
- **Special**: [Any edge cases]
**Business rules affecting UI**:
- [Rule that changes what's visible/enabled]
- [Permissions that affect actions]
### <Next Screen/Component>
...
## Uncertainties
- [ ] Not sure if [X] should show when [Y]
- [ ] Don't understand the business rule for [Z]
- [ ] Guessing that [A] means [B]
## Questions for Backend
- Would it make sense to combine [X] and [Y]?
- Should I expect [Z] to always be present?
- Is there existing data I can reuse for [W]?
## Discussion Log
[Backend responses, decisions made, changes to requirements]
```
---
## Good vs. Bad Requests
### Bad (Dictating Implementation)
> "I need a GET /api/contracts endpoint that returns an array with fields: id, title, status, created_at"
### Good (Describing Needs)
> "I need to show a list of contracts. Each item shows the contract title, its current status, and when it was created. User should be able to filter by status."
### Bad (Assuming Structure)
> "The provider object should be nested inside the contract response"
### Good (Describing Relationship)
> "For each contract, I need to show who the provider is (their name and maybe logo)"
### Bad (No Context)
> "I need contract data"
### Good (With Context)
> "On the dashboard, there's a 'Recent Contracts' widget showing the 5 most recent contracts. User clicks one to go to detail page."
---
## Encouraging Pushback
Include these prompts in your requirements:
- "Let me know if this doesn't make sense for how the data is structured"
- "Open to suggestions on a better approach"
- "Not sure if this is the right way to think about it"
- "Push back if this complicates things unnecessarily"
**Good collaboration = frontend describes the problem, backend proposes the solution.**
---
## Rules
- **NO IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS**—don't specify endpoints, methods, field names
- **DESCRIBE, DON'T PRESCRIBE**—say what you need, not how to provide it
- **INCLUDE CONTEXT**—why you need it helps backend make better choices
- **SURFACE UNKNOWNS**—don't hide confusion, invite clarification
- **INVITE PUSHBACK**—explicitly ask for backend's input
- **UPDATE THE DOC**—add backend responses to Discussion Log
- **STAY HUMBLE**—you're asking, not demanding
---
## After Backend Responds
Update the requirements doc:
1. Add responses to Discussion Log
2. Adjust requirements based on feedback
3. Mark resolved uncertainties
4. Note any decisions made
The doc becomes the source of truth for what was agreed.
This skill helps frontend developers document the data and behavior they need from backend teams without dictating implementation. It produces a clear, discussion-ready backend requirements document that focuses on what the UI needs to render screens, support actions, and handle states. The output encourages questions and invites backend pushback to arrive at a shared solution.
You describe a feature, its users, and the success criteria; the skill guides you to list the data to display, user actions, UI states, business rules, uncertainties, and open questions. It enforces ‘describe not prescribe’—no endpoints, field names, or implementation instructions—so backend owns structure and APIs. The final artifact is a structured requirements doc ready for collaboration and iterative updates.
Should I include field names or endpoint details?
No. Describe the data and relationships you need; leave field names and endpoints to backend.
What if I don’t know a business rule?
Mark it as an uncertainty and add specific questions for backend to clarify.
How do I handle performance or caching requirements?
Describe the expected UX (e.g., staleness tolerances, acceptable loading behaviors) but let backend propose caching strategies.