# Specification Quality Checklist: Tenant-Owned Surface Route Audit

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2026-05-14
**Feature**: [spec.md](../spec.md)

## Content Quality

- [x] No runtime implementation details are required for the behavior contract; repo surfaces are named only to bound the audit.
- [x] Focused on user value and business needs: a repo-verified repair inventory and follow-up order.
- [x] Written for product, implementation, and review stakeholders.
- [x] All mandatory Spec Kit and constitution sections are completed.

## Requirement Completeness

- [x] No `[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]` markers remain.
- [x] Requirements are testable and unambiguous.
- [x] Success criteria are measurable.
- [x] Success criteria are scoped to the audit artifact and validation evidence.
- [x] All acceptance scenarios are defined.
- [x] Edge cases are identified.
- [x] Scope is clearly bounded to docs/spec artifacts and repo audit.
- [x] Dependencies and assumptions are identified.

## Feature Readiness

- [x] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria.
- [x] User scenarios cover inventory, classification, and repair-order flows.
- [x] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria.
- [x] No application implementation is hidden inside the specification.

## Candidate Selection Gate

- [x] Candidate is explicitly present in `docs/product/spec-candidates.md`.
- [x] Candidate was directly promoted by the user as `302`.
- [x] Related Spec 301 is treated as completed context and is not modified.
- [x] Close alternatives are deferred with rationale.
- [x] Scope is a small, reviewable audit/prep slice.

## Spec Readiness Notes

- Runtime code changes are explicitly out of scope.
- The later implementation deliverable is expected to be `surface-route-audit.md` inside this spec package.
- Any runtime defect discovered during the audit must be documented as a follow-up blocker or candidate, not fixed in this spec.
