153 lines
5.4 KiB
Markdown
153 lines
5.4 KiB
Markdown
# Feature Specification: [FEATURE NAME]
|
|
|
|
**Feature Branch**: `[###-feature-name]`
|
|
**Created**: [DATE]
|
|
**Status**: Draft
|
|
**Input**: User description: "$ARGUMENTS"
|
|
|
|
## User Scenarios & Testing *(mandatory)*
|
|
|
|
<!--
|
|
IMPORTANT: User stories should be PRIORITIZED as user journeys ordered by importance.
|
|
Each user story/journey must be INDEPENDENTLY TESTABLE - meaning if you implement just ONE of them,
|
|
you should still have a viable MVP (Minimum Viable Product) that delivers value.
|
|
|
|
Assign priorities (P1, P2, P3, etc.) to each story, where P1 is the most critical.
|
|
Think of each story as a standalone slice of functionality that can be:
|
|
- Developed independently
|
|
- Tested independently
|
|
- Deployed independently
|
|
- Demonstrated to users independently
|
|
-->
|
|
|
|
### User Story 1 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P1)
|
|
|
|
[Describe this user journey in plain language]
|
|
|
|
**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]
|
|
|
|
**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently - e.g., "Can be fully tested by [specific action] and delivers [specific value]"]
|
|
|
|
**Acceptance Scenarios**:
|
|
|
|
1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
|
|
2. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### User Story 2 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P2)
|
|
|
|
[Describe this user journey in plain language]
|
|
|
|
**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]
|
|
|
|
**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently]
|
|
|
|
**Acceptance Scenarios**:
|
|
|
|
1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### User Story 3 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P3)
|
|
|
|
[Describe this user journey in plain language]
|
|
|
|
**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]
|
|
|
|
**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently]
|
|
|
|
**Acceptance Scenarios**:
|
|
|
|
1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
[Add more user stories as needed, each with an assigned priority]
|
|
|
|
### Edge Cases
|
|
|
|
<!--
|
|
ACTION REQUIRED: The content in this section represents placeholders.
|
|
Fill them out with the right edge cases.
|
|
-->
|
|
|
|
- What happens when [boundary condition]?
|
|
- How does system handle [error scenario]?
|
|
|
|
## Requirements *(mandatory)*
|
|
|
|
<!--
|
|
ACTION REQUIRED: The content in this section represents placeholders.
|
|
Fill them out with the right functional requirements.
|
|
-->
|
|
|
|
### Functional Requirements
|
|
|
|
- **FR-001**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "allow users to create accounts"]
|
|
- **FR-002**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "validate email addresses"]
|
|
- **FR-003**: Users MUST be able to [key interaction, e.g., "reset their password"]
|
|
- **FR-004**: System MUST [data requirement, e.g., "persist user preferences"]
|
|
- **FR-005**: System MUST [behavior, e.g., "log all security events"]
|
|
|
|
*Example of marking unclear requirements:*
|
|
|
|
- **FR-006**: System MUST authenticate users via [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: auth method not specified - email/password, SSO, OAuth?]
|
|
- **FR-007**: System MUST retain user data for [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: retention period not specified]
|
|
|
|
### Technical Requirements (Constitution-Driven)
|
|
|
|
**Tech Stack Compliance**:
|
|
- [ ] All HTTP operations use Fiber framework (no `net/http` shortcuts)
|
|
- [ ] All database operations use GORM (no `database/sql` direct calls)
|
|
- [ ] All JSON operations use sonic (no `encoding/json` usage)
|
|
- [ ] All async tasks use Asynq
|
|
- [ ] All logging uses Zap + Lumberjack.v2
|
|
- [ ] All configuration uses Viper
|
|
|
|
**Architecture Requirements**:
|
|
- [ ] Implementation follows Handler → Service → Store → Model layers
|
|
- [ ] Dependencies injected via Service/Store structs
|
|
- [ ] Unified error codes defined in `pkg/errors/`
|
|
- [ ] Unified API responses via `pkg/response/`
|
|
|
|
**API Design Requirements**:
|
|
- [ ] All APIs follow RESTful principles
|
|
- [ ] All responses use unified JSON format with code/message/data/timestamp
|
|
- [ ] All error messages include error codes and bilingual descriptions
|
|
- [ ] All pagination uses standard parameters (page, page_size, total)
|
|
- [ ] All time fields use ISO 8601 format (RFC3339)
|
|
- [ ] All currency amounts use integers (cents)
|
|
|
|
**Performance Requirements**:
|
|
- [ ] API response time (P95) < 200ms
|
|
- [ ] Database queries < 50ms
|
|
- [ ] Batch operations use bulk queries
|
|
- [ ] List queries implement pagination (default 20, max 100)
|
|
- [ ] Non-realtime operations delegated to async tasks
|
|
|
|
**Testing Requirements**:
|
|
- [ ] Unit tests for all Service layer business logic
|
|
- [ ] Integration tests for all API endpoints
|
|
- [ ] Tests are independent and use mocks/testcontainers
|
|
- [ ] Target coverage: 70%+ overall, 90%+ for core business logic
|
|
|
|
### Key Entities *(include if feature involves data)*
|
|
|
|
- **[Entity 1]**: [What it represents, key attributes without implementation]
|
|
- **[Entity 2]**: [What it represents, relationships to other entities]
|
|
|
|
## Success Criteria *(mandatory)*
|
|
|
|
<!--
|
|
ACTION REQUIRED: Define measurable success criteria.
|
|
These must be technology-agnostic and measurable.
|
|
-->
|
|
|
|
### Measurable Outcomes
|
|
|
|
- **SC-001**: [Measurable metric, e.g., "Users can complete account creation in under 2 minutes"]
|
|
- **SC-002**: [Measurable metric, e.g., "System handles 1000 concurrent users without degradation"]
|
|
- **SC-003**: [User satisfaction metric, e.g., "90% of users successfully complete primary task on first attempt"]
|
|
- **SC-004**: [Business metric, e.g., "Reduce support tickets related to [X] by 50%"]
|