Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Mission Repository Encapsulation

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-03-27 Mission: kitty-specs/058-mission-template-repository-refactor/spec.md

Content Quality

  • ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs
  • ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders
  • ✅ All mandatory sections completed

Notes: The spec includes a "Proposed API" section with Python signatures -- this is acceptable for an internal refactor spec where the "users" are developers consuming the API. The spec stays at the behavioral level (what methods do) without prescribing internal implementation.

Requirement Completeness

  • ✅ No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
  • ✅ Requirements are testable and unambiguous
  • ✅ Requirement types are separated (Functional / Non-Functional / Constraints)
  • ✅ IDs are unique across FR-###, NFR-###, and C-### entries
  • ✅ All requirement rows include a non-empty Status value
  • ✅ Non-functional requirements include measurable thresholds
  • ✅ Success criteria are measurable
  • ✅ Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
  • ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
  • ✅ Edge cases are identified
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded
  • ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified

Notes: 18 FRs, 4 NFRs, 5 Constraints. All have status "Proposed". NFRs have concrete thresholds (zero ImportError, zero regressions, fresh reads, safe_load only). Edge cases covered: nonexistent missions, nonexistent templates, missing project_dir, no overrides present.

Mission Readiness

  • ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows
  • ✅ Mission meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
  • ✅ No implementation details leak into specification

Notes: 9 user stories with 26 acceptance scenarios total. Stories cover: content reads, resolution, enumeration, action assets, mission config, expected artifacts, backward compat, and consumer rerouting.

Notes

  • All items pass. Spec is ready for /spec-kitty.plan.
  • The spec intentionally includes Python method signatures in the User Scenarios because the "users" are internal developers and AI agents consuming the API. This is appropriate for an internal refactor spec.