Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Dead-Port Disposition: RuntimeEventEmitter Seam Consolidation
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-09-06 Feature: spec.md
Content Quality
- ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — the spec names the seam, factory, and log as domain concepts; code anchors live in the ADR, not here
- ✅ Focused on user value and business needs — operator decision-history completeness (P1), maintainer single-owner seam (P2), future-producer guidance (P3)
- ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders — Intent Summary and Domain Language table carry the reader
- ✅ All mandatory sections completed
Requirement Completeness
- ✅ No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain — three Decision Moments resolved; ledger verified clean
- ✅ Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- ✅ Requirement types are separated (Functional / Non-Functional / Constraints)
- ✅ IDs are unique across FR-###, NFR-###, and C-### entries (FR-001–011, NFR-001–007, C-001–007)
- ✅ 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 — C-001 binds the ADR's blocked list; C-002 excludes the live producer
- ✅ 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
- Validation iteration 1: all items pass. Ready for
/spec-kitty.plan. - SC-001 and SC-005 name a class and module by identifier because the ADR's confirmation criteria do; they are countable outcomes, not implementation prescriptions.