Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Single-Authority Resolution Parity
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-08-19 Feature: spec.md
Content Quality
- ✅ No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs) — normative FR/NFR/C are behavioral; file/function seams are isolated in a clearly-marked non-normative Technical Context section
- ✅ Focused on user value and business needs — operator trust that authored doctrine takes effect
- ✅ Written for non-technical stakeholders — operator/maintainer framing with plain-language overview
- ✅ All mandatory sections completed
Requirement Completeness
- ✅ No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain — the three open scope decisions were resolved with the operator
- ✅ 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 (100% parity; 71%→0%; falsifiable both directions)
- ✅ Success criteria are measurable
- ✅ Success criteria are technology-agnostic — outcomes framed as operator-observable
- ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
- ✅ Edge cases are identified
- ✅ Scope is clearly bounded (C-004 names the out-of-scope siblings)
- ✅ Dependencies and assumptions identified
Feature Readiness
- ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- ✅ User scenarios cover primary flows (nested discovery, loader/resolver parity, kind vocabulary)
- ✅ Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- ✅ No implementation details leak into normative specification
Notes
- All items pass. The three operator decisions (unconditional recursion; preserve the 10-kind map; widen the selector) are encoded as C-001, C-003, and FR-006 respectively.
- Ready for
/spec-kitty.plan.