Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Naming/Identity Routing Rider

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-06-16 Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — seam/file names are domain entities, not implementation prescriptions
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs (adoption of the existing SSOT; regression safety)
  • ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders (purpose + scenarios are plain-language)
  • ✅ 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
  • ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined (3 scenarios + test-design principle)
  • ✅ Edge cases are identified (regression reintroduction; wrong-fragment conflation)
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (explicit Out of Scope + deferred tickets)
  • ✅ 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

sequencing decision, not a spec gap.

encoded as binding constraints.

  • The #1993 carry-vs-defer decision (C-002) is deliberately deferred to /spec-kitty.plan — it is a
  • "Function over form" testing (NFR-002) + verification-by-deletion (C-004) are operator-mandated and
  • All items pass; ready for /spec-kitty.plan.