Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Doctrine-Controlled Transition Gates

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

Content Quality

mission_step_contract, _gate_coverage) because the product under change is the Spec Kitty CLI itself — these are canonical domain terms, not leaked choices. Consumer runners (pytest / Go / npm) appear only as external-repo context, never as our stack.

  • ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
  • Note: the spec names internal domain surfaces (ScopeSource, MissionStep.gates,
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs
  • ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders (maintainer-facing, but value-first)
  • ✅ All mandatory sections completed

Requirement Completeness

complexity ≤15, ≥90% coverage, ≤1 graph load per transition)

are context, not our implementation)

  • ✅ 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 (100% parity, 0 crashes,
  • ✅ Success criteria are measurable
  • ✅ Success criteria are technology-agnostic (outcome-framed; external-runner mentions
  • ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
  • ✅ Edge cases are identified
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (C-001/C-002 exclusions + Assumptions)
  • ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified

Feature Readiness

fail-open)

  • ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria (via prioritized user stories)
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (consumer gating, behaviour parity, doctrine toggle,
  • ✅ Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
  • ✅ No implementation details leak into specification (beyond canonical domain surfaces)

Notes

4-lens pre-spec research pass (folded into research.md at plan time); no clarifications remain open.

blockers + roadmap/coupling gaps) — all reconciled into the spec (now 15 FR / 6 NFR / 6 C). See reviews/post-spec-squad.md. Every load-bearing code claim was verified against source before amending.

  • All checklist items pass. The six architectural decisions were pre-resolved during a
  • Post-spec adversarial squad (2026-07-22) applied 12 findings (2 architectural
  • Ready for /spec-kitty.plan.