Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Internal --feature & status_service sanitization

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-06-15 Feature: 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

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

Feature Readiness

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

Notes

01KV5F16HBCX6A99J9AY97B3T5): the wire-vs-retire call for the three test-exercised status_service symbols is deliberately deferred to plan/research, where PR #1614 archaeology and a test-impact review can resolve it. This is an explicit operator-sanctioned deferral, not a quality gap — both outcomes are bounded by the same scope, so it does not block /spec-kitty.plan.

  • One intentional [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] remains (FR-007, decision_id