Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Mission-State Repair Audit-Trail Durability
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-09-23 Feature: spec.md
Content Quality
(Code anchors appear only in the Problem/Edge-Cases grounding of a brownfield fix; the FR/NFR/C rows are outcome-stated.)
- ✅ 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
- Two governing Decision Moments resolved during discovery: both-relocate-and-warn (fix direction) and write-only-operator-commits (commit behavior). Both recorded in
decisions/. - Scope boundary is hard (C-001): placement/visibility only, no canonicality change.
- Brownfield finding folded into spec: the duplicate-key repair flow (FR-006) and the
_POLICY_TRACKED/.gitignorecontradiction (FR-007).