4.3 KiB
Specification Quality Checklist: Fiber Middleware Integration with Configuration Management
Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2025-11-10
Feature: 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
- 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
Feature Readiness
- All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- User scenarios cover primary flows
- Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- No implementation details leak into specification
Validation Results
Content Quality Assessment
✅ PASS: The specification focuses on user value and business outcomes without implementation details. While technical components (Viper, Zap, Redis) are mentioned in the functional requirements, they describe what capabilities the system must provide (configuration management, structured logging, token validation) rather than how to implement them. The Technical Requirements section appropriately references the project constitution's technology choices.
✅ PASS: The specification is written from a business/operations perspective with user stories framed around administrator needs, API consumer expectations, and system reliability outcomes.
✅ PASS: All mandatory sections (User Scenarios, Requirements, Success Criteria) are completed with detailed content.
Requirement Completeness Assessment
✅ PASS: No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers present. All requirements are concrete and specific.
✅ PASS: All functional requirements are testable with clear expected behaviors (e.g., "detect changes within 5 seconds", "return HTTP 401 with specific error format").
✅ PASS: Success criteria include specific measurable metrics:
- Time-based: "within 5 seconds", "within 50ms", "within 100ms"
- Percentage-based: "100% consistency", "100% of HTTP requests"
- Behavior-based: "automatically rotate when reaching configured size limits"
✅ PASS: Success criteria are technology-agnostic, focusing on user/system outcomes (e.g., "System administrators can modify configuration and see it applied" rather than "Viper watches config files").
✅ PASS: All user stories include detailed acceptance scenarios in Given-When-Then format.
✅ PASS: Edge cases section covers 7 different failure/boundary scenarios with expected behaviors.
✅ PASS: Scope is clearly bounded through prioritized user stories (P1, P2, P3) and explicitly states rate limiting is "implemented but disabled by default".
✅ PASS: Dependencies identified through Technical Requirements section referencing constitution standards, and implicit dependencies on Redis for token validation.
Feature Readiness Assessment
✅ PASS: Each of the 22 functional requirements maps to acceptance scenarios in user stories and success criteria.
✅ PASS: Seven prioritized user stories cover the complete feature set from foundational (configuration, logging) to security (authentication) to optional (rate limiting).
✅ PASS: Ten success criteria provide measurable validation for all major functional areas.
✅ PASS: Technical Requirements section appropriately references existing project standards rather than introducing new implementation details.
Overall Assessment
STATUS: ✅ READY FOR PLANNING
All checklist items pass validation. The specification is complete, testable, and ready for the /speckit.plan phase.
Notes
- The specification successfully balances business requirements with project constitution compliance
- User stories are well-prioritized with clear independent test criteria
- Edge cases demonstrate thorough consideration of failure scenarios
- Success criteria provide clear acceptance thresholds without prescribing implementation approaches