Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: CI Suite Stability & Test-Isolation

Created: 2026-09-09 | Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • [~] No implementation details — Justified: code-internal runtime-concurrency fix (#4017) + test-classification chore (#4015); the offending seams (bootstrap.py, asset_preparation.py, test_performance_marker_guard.py) are the subject and were grounded by the pre-mission squad. Audience = maintainers.
  • ✅ Focused on user value (supported concurrency model works; per-PR suite stable)
  • [~] Written for non-technical stakeholders — purpose_tldr/context carry the legible framing
  • ✅ All mandatory sections completed

Requirement Completeness

  • ✅ No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers (grounding done; operator locked both fix directions)
  • ✅ Requirements testable and unambiguous
  • ✅ Types separated (FR/NFR/C)
  • ✅ IDs unique
  • ✅ Status populated (all Open)
  • ✅ NFRs measurable (0 errors across iterations; no new warm-path lock; 0 functional-coverage loss; guard green)
  • ✅ Success criteria measurable
  • [~] Success criteria technology-agnostic — Justified: success is defined by specific tests/gates (quarantined e2e tests, #3665 guard) for this CI-internal mission
  • ✅ Acceptance scenarios defined (US1 5 scenarios, US2 4 scenarios)
  • ✅ Edge cases identified
  • ✅ Scope bounded (2 clusters, C-005 independence, C-006 optional lane move)
  • ✅ Dependencies/assumptions identified

Feature Readiness

  • ✅ All FRs have acceptance criteria
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (concurrency fix + timing sweep)
  • ✅ Meets measurable outcomes
  • [~] No implementation details leak — intentional/justified as above

Notes

  • Three [~] items are deliberate exceptions for a code-internal CI-stability mission, not gaps.
  • No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers; discovery minimized per operator instruction (grounding squad + two locked AskUserQuestion decisions served as the gate).