Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Canonical Path-Trust & Guard-Capability Seams
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before /spec-kitty.plan Created: 2026-06-17 Feature: spec.md
Content Quality
- ✅ No implementation details leak as requirements (file/symbol refs are scope anchors, not impl prescriptions)
- ✅ Focused on the value (one authority for each path-trust decision; unmaskable gate)
- ✅ Written so a maintainer/stakeholder can follow it
- ✅ All mandatory sections completed
Requirement Completeness
- ✅ No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- ✅ Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- ✅ Requirement types separated (FR / NFR / C)
- ✅ IDs unique across FR-###, NFR-###, C-###
- ✅ All requirement rows have a non-empty Status
- ✅ Non-functional requirements include measurable thresholds
- ✅ Success criteria are measurable
- ✅ Success criteria are technology-agnostic where the outcome allows (some are infra-specific by nature — guard/CI mission)
- ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined (US-1..US-6)
- ✅ Edge cases identified (real-format slug union; XOR-helper holdout; #1716-blocked pin)
- ✅ Scope clearly bounded (Out of Scope + C-007 binding non-goals)
- ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified
Feature Readiness
- ✅ All FRs have clear acceptance criteria (mapped to SC-001..007)
- ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows
- ✅ Meets measurable outcomes in Success Criteria
- ✅ No stray implementation prescriptions beyond necessary scope anchors
Notes
infrastructure-specific (CI trigger coverage, ratchet keying) — that is intrinsic to the value, not a leak.
- This is a guard/CI + Shared-Kernel refactor mission; some Success Criteria are necessarily
- Goal C's staple-on-vs-split call is deliberately deferred to plan (C-003), not left as a spec ambiguity.