u/Medical_Landscape956

Disclosure: my own tool, free alpha, not selling anything — I need honest signal from people who run real sprints. The premise: paste messy requirements, get INVEST-compliant stories with acceptance criteria, plus a per-criterion breakdown of what fails and why. The bit I care about isn't "did it produce stories" — it's whether you'd actually pull them into a sprint without rewriting. So my ask: run it on something real from your backlog and tell me your "ship-as-is rate" — what % of the output would you use as-is or with minor edits? If that number's under ~60%, I want to know exactly why. Link: https://story-craft-web.vercel.app (free). I'll be in the comments answering anything about how it scores Small/Independent in particular, since those are the ones it's strictest on.

Upfront: this is my own project, so treat it as self-promo (flagging it as such). I'm posting because I want this group's criticism. You don't need to sign up to give it — paste a requirement here and I'll run it and post the raw output, or DM me. The signup's only there for people who want to actually use it on their own backlog..

Context — I spent too many refinement sessions watching decent-looking stories still fail INVEST: too big, hidden dependencies, untestable. So I built StoryCraft. You paste a requirement, it generates stories with acceptance criteria, and for each one it tells you which INVEST criterion fails and why — not just a pass/fail badge.

What I actually want to know from people who do this for real: - Is the output good enough that you'd use it instead of writing stories yourself, or is it faster from scratch? - Where does it consistently get things wrong? - Is "explain why each INVEST criterion fails" genuinely useful, or just noise? It's a free alpha: https://story-craft-web.vercel.app — no card, ~10 free generations. Happy to talk through the validation logic in the comments either way. Be brutal.