Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Charter Pack level declared in pack.yaml

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-10-11 Mission: spec.md

Content Quality

  • ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — tempered: this is an internal governance/tooling mission; code paths are named only where they are the subject of the requirement, not as implementation prescription
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs (mis-placed packs refused by name; vendoring unblocked; one vocabulary)
  • ✅ Written for the relevant stakeholders (pack authors, CLI operators, vendor tooling, core maintainer)
  • ✅ 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-###, C-### and SC-### entries, and match the requirement-ID grammar
  • ✅ All requirement rows include a non-empty Status value
  • ✅ Non-functional requirements include measurable thresholds
  • ✅ Every FR row and success criterion carries a delivery label and no-op mark
  • ✅ Success criteria are measurable
  • ✅ Success criteria are technology-agnostic where the outcome allows
  • ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
  • ✅ Edge cases are identified
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (Out of Scope section + C-007)
  • ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified

Mission Readiness

  • ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (6 prioritized stories)
  • ✅ Mission meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
  • ✅ No implementation details leak into specification beyond the named subjects of requirements

Notes

  • Pre-spec discovery was completed via grounding + an adversarial architect review + explicit operator rulings; the interview was skipped by operator instruction, and the confirmed Intent Summary is recorded in spec.md.
  • This is an internal governance + tooling mission, so some requirements necessarily name code surfaces (e.g. kernel.pack_tiers, snapshot_sha256) as the subject of the change. That is intentional and does not constitute implementation prescription.