Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Docs Structural Sanity & Concern Guard

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-07-22 Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — references are to existing canonical doc-infra surfaces the mission must integrate with (redirect-map, page-inventory, relative_link_fixer, terminology guard), not new tech choices; unavoidable for a docs-infra mission and kept at the "which canonical surface" level.
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs (legible, non-drifting docs for contributors/maintainers)
  • ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders (purpose TL;DR + context are stakeholder-facing)
  • ✅ 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 (all Open)
  • ✅ Non-functional requirements include measurable thresholds (0 broken links, 100% detection, <5s, no baseline-URL 404 regression)
  • ✅ Success criteria are measurable
  • ✅ Success criteria are technology-agnostic (outcome-framed: counts, coverage %, pass/fail)
  • ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
  • ✅ Edge cases are identified
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (5 audit findings; guides/ excluded; #2215/#2227 coordinated/deferred)
  • ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified

Feature Readiness

  • ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria (via mapped user stories + scenarios)
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (5 prioritized, independently testable slices)
  • ✅ Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
  • ✅ No implementation details leak into specification (beyond necessary canonical-surface integration points)

Notes

  • Change mode is bulk_edit (file moves + cross-file referrer repointing); a plan-phase occurrence_map.yaml is required (C-006 / DIRECTIVE_035).
  • The naming collision between this spec's FR-003 and the docs' own "FR-003" guides-zone boundary is intentional and disambiguated in prose (the latter is captured as C-001).
  • All checklist items pass; ready for /spec-kitty.plan.