Every catastrophic system design failure—every project that ran 3x over budget, every platform that collapsed under its first million users, every startup that built the wrong product—shares a common origin: a fundamental misunderstanding of what the system actually needed to do.

Core features identification isn't merely the first step in system design; it's the step that determines whether every subsequent decision will build upon solid ground or quicksand. Yet in the rush to demonstrate technical prowess—to sketch architectures, debate database choices, or showcase microservices patterns—many engineers treat requirements gathering as a procedural formality rather than the intellectual discipline it truly is.

This page will fundamentally change how you approach the opening minutes of any system design challenge. You'll learn to identify what a system must do versus what it might do, to recognize feature requests that are actually architecture constraints in disguise, and to ask the questions that separate Principal Engineers from those who merely implement specifications handed down from above.

Before we can identify core features, we must precisely define what we mean by the term. In system design, core features are the fundamental capabilities without which the system would fail to serve its primary purpose.

Consider this definition carefully. It contains two critical elements:

1. Fundamental capabilities — These are actions the system can perform or states it can maintain
2. Primary purpose — The central reason the system exists

Core features exist at the intersection of these two elements. They are not merely 'important features' or 'features we should have'; they are the features that define the system's very identity.

The Feature Hierarchy:

Not all features are created equal. Understanding where features fall in the hierarchy is essential for making sound design decisions:

The Danger of Misclassification:

When engineers misclassify features, the consequences cascade through the entire system:

• Treating enhancement features as core leads to over-engineering, delayed launches, and premature optimization
• Treating core features as enhancements leads to architectural decisions that make core operations slow, expensive, or impossible to scale

A payment system that treats 'process payment' as an enhancement—optimizing instead for 'display payment history'—will have an architecture fundamentally misaligned with its purpose. The history feature might be blazing fast while the actual payment processing becomes a bottleneck.

Identifying core features is not an act of intuition—it's a disciplined process that Principal Engineers have refined through years of practice. The following methodology provides a repeatable framework for extracting features from any system design challenge.

Phase 1: Establish the System's Raison d'Être

Before listing any features, you must answer one question with crystalline clarity: What problem does this system solve?

This isn't about what the system does; it's about why the system exists. Every feature must trace back to solving this core problem.

Phase 2: Identify the Core User Journeys

With the system's purpose established, map the primary paths users take to achieve that purpose. These are not edge cases or administrative workflows—they are the journeys that represent 80%+ of system interactions.

For each core journey, document:

• Entry point: How does the user initiate this journey?
• Steps: What actions must the user take?
• System responses: What must the system do at each step?
• Success criteria: How does the user know the journey completed successfully?
• Failure handling: What happens when something goes wrong?

Phase 3: Extract Feature Capabilities from Journeys

With journeys mapped, extract the discrete capabilities the system must provide. A capability is a specific function the system performs—not a user action, but a system action.

Transform each journey step into capabilities. The ride request journey above yields:

• Location services (determine current location)
• Geocoding (convert addresses to coordinates)
• Route calculation (find optimal path)
• Fare estimation (calculate cost)
• Driver matching (allocate appropriate driver)
• Real-time tracking (monitor driver location)
• Payment processing (collect and distribute funds)
• Push notifications (alert users of status changes)

Phase 4: Apply the Essentiality Filter

With a list of capabilities extracted, apply rigorous filtering to separate core from non-core:

The Removal Test: If you remove this capability entirely, can the core journey still complete?

• If YES → It's not core (might be essential or enhancement)
• If NO → It's a candidate for core

The Substitution Test: Could this capability be provided by humans, external systems, or workarounds in v1?

• If YES → It's not core to your system (might be integration point)
• If NO → It's core to your system

The Day-One Test: If this capability doesn't work on launch day, would you delay the launch?

• If YES → It's core
• If NO → It's not core

The most dangerous features are the ones no one mentions because everyone assumes they're obvious. These implicit features are often more critical than the explicit ones listed in requirements—and missing them is a hallmark of junior engineering.

Principal Engineers develop pattern recognition for these hidden requirements. Here are the categories you must always consider:

The Iceberg Principle:

For every explicit feature visible above the waterline, expect several implicit features lurking below. A simple 'user registration' feature seen by stakeholders actually includes:

Technique: The Assumption Audit

To surface implicit features, systematically challenge every assumption:

1. List every noun in the requirements (user, account, order, payment)
2. For each noun, ask: 'What must be true for this to work?'
3. For each verb (create, update, delete, view), ask: 'Who, when, how, and what if it fails?'
4. For each adjective (fast, secure, reliable), ask: 'How will we measure and ensure this?'

This audit converts hidden assumptions into explicit requirements before they become costly surprises.

Core features rarely exist in isolation. They form dependency graphs where some features must exist before others can function. Understanding these dependencies is crucial for both system design and development planning.

Dependency Types:

Features can depend on each other in several ways:

Building the Feature Dependency Graph:

For each core feature, document:

• What features must exist before this feature can work?
• What data must exist before this feature can work?
• What system state must be established before this feature can work?
• What features depend on this feature?

The result is a directed acyclic graph (DAG) showing feature relationships. This graph reveals:

• Foundation features: Features with no dependencies but many dependents (must be rock-solid)
• Bottleneck features: Features that many others depend on (must be highly available)
• Leaf features: Features with many dependencies but no dependents (can be built last)
• Cycles: Mutual dependencies indicating design problems (must be resolved)

Principal Engineers serve as translators between business stakeholders and technical implementation. Feature identification requires bridging two different vocabularies and mental models.

The Translation Challenge:

Business stakeholders describe what they want in terms of:

• Business outcomes ('increase conversion rates')
• User experiences ('make checkout faster')
• Competitive features ('be like Amazon')
• Metrics ('reduce cart abandonment by 15%')

Technical teams need to know:

• Specific capabilities ('sub-200ms response time on cart operations')
• Data requirements ('store abandoned cart state for 30 days')
• Integration points ('connect to 3 payment providers')
• Constraints ('comply with PCI-DSS for payment handling')

The Clarification Protocol:

When business requirements are vague, use this protocol to extract technical requirements:

1. Restate and Confirm: 'So what you're saying is...' — ensures you understood
2. Explore Scope: 'Does this include...?' — defines boundaries
3. Find Edge Cases: 'What happens when...?' — reveals complexity
4. Quantify: 'How many/how fast/how often?' — converts quality to quantity
5. Prioritize: 'If we could only do one of these, which?' — reveals true needs
6. Validate with Examples: 'So a user would...?' — ensures shared understanding

Once core features are identified, they must be documented in a way that guides design and prevents scope creep. Effective feature documentation serves multiple audiences: architects designing the system, developers implementing it, testers validating it, and stakeholders reviewing progress.

The Core Feature Specification Format:

Each core feature should be documented with the following elements:

Even experienced engineers fall into predictable traps during feature identification. Awareness of these patterns helps you avoid them.

Recovery Strategies:

When you realize you've fallen into a pitfall:

• Solution-first: Step back and do a 'requirements audit'—list features without mentioning technology
• Inflation: Rank features by user impact × frequency; cut the bottom 20%
• Paralysis: Commit to a 'v1 feature set,' with explicit 'to be determined' markers for unknowns
• Assumed understanding: Write definitions for every domain term; review with stakeholders
• Missing ops: Add 'As an operator...' user stories to your requirements process

Let's apply everything we've learned to a realistic system design scenario. We'll walk through the complete feature identification process for a food delivery platform.

Initial Brief from Stakeholders:

'Build a food delivery system like DoorDash. Users should be able to order food from local restaurants and have it delivered to their location. Restaurants should be able to manage their menus and orders. Drivers should be able to accept deliveries.'

Step 1: Establish the Raison d'Être

The system exists to connect hungry customers with local restaurants, facilitating the ordering and delivery of food.

Step 2: Identify User Personas and Core Journeys

Step 3: Extract Core Capabilities from Customer Journey

Step 4: Apply Essentiality Filters

For each extracted capability, apply our three tests:

Step 5: Final Core Feature List

After completing this analysis for all personas, our core features are:

Core feature identification is the foundation upon which all successful system designs are built. The discipline required to distinguish core from essential from enhancement features separates engineers who build what's needed from those who over-engineer or under-deliver.

Key Takeaways:

What's Next:

With core feature identification mastered, we turn to the discipline of capturing features through user stories and use cases. While we've touched on user-story format, the next page will dive deep into creating user stories that drive development, use cases that catch edge conditions, and documentation patterns that keep teams aligned.