Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Mission-identity naming seam & #1908 panel hardening
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-06-15 Feature: spec.md
Content Quality
- ✅ No implementation details beyond the named bug surfaces (necessary to scope defect fixes)
- ✅ Focused on correctness/robustness value
- ✅ Readable by a technical stakeholder
- ✅ 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 verifiable
- ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined (one per issue)
- ✅ Edge cases identified (embedded-slug, coincidental-8-char, multi-dep conflict)
- ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (two clusters, explicit out-of-scope)
- ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified
Feature Readiness
- ✅ Every FR maps to an addressed issue with a clear acceptance scenario
- ✅ User scenarios cover the primary flows (merge / compose / parse / lane / base-ref / accept)
- ✅ Mission meets measurable outcomes in Success Criteria
- ✅ Bounded conflict surface stated (NFR-001) for rebase-safety
Notes
its merge depends on the #1978 fix (C-005).
#1868/#1795/#1666/#1914 (C-002), never under #1929.
- TDD-first (FR-009/C-001): every fix lands with a failing-then-passing regression test.
- Sequencing: #1978 is prioritized — this mission's own slug embeds its mid8, so
- #1929 is a meta-checklist tracker; findings parent under functional epics