# Specification Quality Checklist: CI Test Matrix & Runtime Budget Enforcement

**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
**Created**: 2026-04-17
**Feature**: [spec.md](../spec.md)

## Content Quality

- [x] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
- [x] Focused on user value and business needs
- [x] Written for non-technical stakeholders
- [x] All mandatory sections completed

## Requirement Completeness

- [x] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
- [x] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
- [x] Success criteria are measurable
- [x] Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
- [x] All acceptance scenarios are defined
- [x] Edge cases are identified
- [x] Scope is clearly bounded
- [x] Dependencies and assumptions identified

## Feature Readiness

- [x] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
- [x] User scenarios cover primary flows
- [x] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
- [x] No implementation details leak into specification

## Notes

- Validation run: 2026-04-17
- No template placeholders or [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain.
- The spec stays repository-governance-focused: it defines trigger policy, budget semantics, artifact expectations, and contributor behavior without prescribing language-, framework-, or API-level implementation.
- CI-specific nouns such as lane, artifact, budget, and failure class are treated as domain requirements for the repository validation contract rather than low-level implementation detail.
- The scope remains intentionally narrow: it operationalizes the existing governance work from Specs 206 through 209 instead of inventing a second test-execution model.
- Items marked incomplete require spec updates before `/speckit.clarify` or `/speckit.plan`.