Checklists

requirements.md

Specification Quality Checklist: Reliability Papercut Sweep

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-06-30 Feature: spec.md

Content Quality

  • [~] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — Intentional exception: this is a brownfield bug-fix mission; the FRs name the specific code surfaces (classify_topology, decision_log, target_branch readers, _coordination_doctor.py) because each defect is localized there and was pinned by a pre-flight investigation. User value is carried by the User Scenarios and the technology-agnostic Success Criteria.
  • ✅ Focused on user value and business needs (operator trust; scenarios + success criteria are outcome-framed)
  • ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders (Purpose, Scenarios, Success Criteria 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 (4 scenarios + edge cases)
  • ✅ Edge cases are identified
  • ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (6 issues in/2 lanes; explicit out-of-scope incl. #2157)
  • ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified

Feature Readiness

  • ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria (mapped to scenarios + success criteria)
  • ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (record-analysis, coord recovery, decision identity, merge-target resolution)
  • ✅ Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
  • [~] No implementation details leak into specification — see Content Quality note (intentional for brownfield bug-fix)

Notes

requirements are inherently tied to specific code surfaces; the user-facing value is preserved in the Scenarios and the technology-agnostic Success Criteria. All other items pass.

(#2250→#2240) were validated against live code by the pre-flight squad and must carry into plan/tasks.

  • The two [~] items are conscious, justified exceptions for a brownfield bug-fix mission whose
  • Binding constraint C-001 (classify_topology stays pure) and sequencing constraint C-002