The Talmud Kiddushin (13a) states:
רב יהודה אמר שמואל: כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן
Rav Yehuda said in the name of Sh'muel: anyone who is not familiar with the nature of divorces and marriages, should not be involved with them.
This is referenced by the Shulhan Arukh (EH 49:3) who explains that this means that one lacking expertise in these areas should not issue halakhic rulings about them. (Not that he cannot officiate the services).
The Taz (EH 49:1) writes that one need not have such great expertise to conduct a kiddushin, since it is simple and does not require issuing halakhic rulings.
דבנתינת קידושין אין שם הרבה פרטים באותו סידור ואין מצוין שינוים שם ששייך בהם הוראה ...וכן המנהג בינינו שמכבדין בסידור קידושין אפילו אינו למדן גדול
For in giving kiddushin there arent many details, and details that require legal rulings are not present there...And so is the custom among us to honor with siddur kiddushin even one who is not a great scholar.
Maharsha writes similarly, in his Hiddushei Aggadot to Kiddushin (13a):
דבקדושין לחוד הכל יודעין בו גם להתיר פנויה לאיש הוא דבר קל ולזה נשתרבב המנהג בדורינו שנותנין רשות לכל אדם היודע קצת לעסוק בקדושין...
משא"כ בגיטין שרבו כמו רבו דיניה והלכותיה בחומר א"א להתירה אין לאדם לעסוק בהן כ"א היודע כו' וכן בקדושין שאחר הגיטין באלו לא יהיה מתעסק בהן כ"א היודע בטיב גיטין שהיו קודם הקידושין אם גיטין גמורים היו דשמא לא היה גט ויתיר ע"י קדושין שאחריו א"א לעלמא
For regarding mere marriage everyone is familiar with it. Also to permit an unmarried woman to a man is a minor thing, and because of this, the custom in our generation developed that we let anyone who is a little familiar with kiddsuhin, [be mesader kiddushin]...In contradistinction to divorce which has many laws and relates to the stringency of permitting a married woman, a person should only deal with them if he knows etc. And similarly, with marriage that follows a divorce, regarding these, a person should only deal with them if he knows the nature of the divorce that preceded the marriage, whether it was a proper divorce, for maybe it wasn't a divorce, and he would be permitting a married woman to remarry.
In summary, while it is very difficult to prove the negative; that is, that there are no requirements, the only Talmudic source AFAIK that could be interpreted as assigning formal requirements for a mesader kiddushin (an institution that incidentally probably did not even exist in the time of Hazal), is the passage in Kiddushin. As noted, the SHA explains (following Rashi) that this refers to issuing legal rulings, and the Taz clarifies that simply officiating a wedding is not included in this. Maharsha similarly implies that the requirement for expertise when dealing with marriage, only applies to remarriage, which is an extension of the expertise required for divorce.