Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Shared battery collection and complete shard-timing provenance
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-10-04 Mission: spec.md
Content Quality
- ✅ 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-###, C-### and SC-### entries, and match the requirement-ID grammar (optional lowercase letter suffix;
<mission-slug>#<ID>only for another mission's ID) - ✅ 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 (no implementation details)
- ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
- ✅ Edge cases are identified
- ✅ Scope is clearly bounded
- ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified
Mission Readiness
- ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows
- ✅ Mission meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- ✅ No implementation details leak into specification
Notes
- The reader is a maintainer; the "user" of this mission is the person landing pull requests, so CI terms (job, shard, collection) are domain language here, not implementation detail.
- Amended after the post-spec adversarial squad (feasibility + requirements lenses): the design became an uncontended pre-test collection step per consuming job, thresholds were re-based on the measured 35–45 s uncontended collection, and the first draft's assumptions became planning checks.