I think in some contexts it makes perfect sense, for example if evaluating a requirement put upon by a third party. But it is a nuanced way of speaking.
If I say "you should have to clean your room before being taken out for ice cream", I'm saying that there should be a requirement that you do the cleaning to get the reward, where perhaps that requirement is not in effect. but maybe I'll put it into effect and am just thinking out loud. Maybe my kids will take the hint and clean their rooms without it needing to be a direct order. Perhaps I'm saying that in earshot of my spouse to see if they agree that it should be a requirement. Or maybe I'm opening it up for discussion and my kids will offer to complete another chore instead and I will find that agreeable.
If I tell my kids "you should clean your rooms before going out for ice cream", I am stating it as a request that might be interpreted as a firm requirement, or maybe if you don't I'll be annoyed and only buy you one scoop. Or clearly I want the rooms clean, but if you promise to do so immediately after the ice cream I'm OK with that too. So there is some ambiguity on whether it is a firm directive, but clearly it is something I want to happen.
If I tell my kids "you have to clean your room before being taken out for ice cream", it is a simple directive. No clean room, no ice cream.