Checklists
requirements.md
Specification Quality Checklist: Templates as Mission Configuration
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning Created: 2026-07-16 Mission: spec.md
Content Quality
- ✅ No implementation plan, code structure, or framework choice is prescribed
- ✅ Focused on maintainer and runtime outcomes defined by issue 2658
- ✅ Written so the authority boundary and user-visible behavior are understandable without reading source code
- ✅ 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-###, andC-###entries - ✅ All requirement rows include a non-empty Status value
- ✅ Non-functional requirements include measurable thresholds
- ✅ Success criteria are measurable
- ✅ Success criteria describe outcomes rather than an implementation sequence
- ✅ All acceptance scenarios are defined
- ✅ Edge cases are identified
- ✅ Scope is clearly bounded
- ✅ Dependencies and assumptions are identified
Mission Readiness
- ✅ All functional requirements have clear acceptance scenarios or measurable outcomes
- ✅ User scenarios cover declared mapping, missing mapping, and compatibility behavior
- ✅ Mission meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- ✅ Planning details are deferred to
/spec-kitty.plan
Notes
- Validation completed in one pass against issue 2658, issue 2652, and the two governing mission-type authority ADRs.
- The unavoidable domain identifiers (
MissionType,template_set, andsoftware-dev-default) describe the existing contract under specification; they do not prescribe a new implementation design. - The temporary parity scaffold is required as migration evidence but explicitly prohibited from the merge-ready tree.