TenantAtlas/specs/205-compare-job-cleanup/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido bb72a54e84 Refactor: remove compare job legacy drift path (#235)
## Summary
- remove the dead legacy drift-computation path from `CompareBaselineToTenantJob` so the strategy-driven compare engine is the only execution path left in the orchestration file
- tighten compare guard and regression coverage around strategy selection, strategy execution context, findings, gaps, and no-drift outcomes
- fix the repo-wide suite blockers uncovered during validation by making the governance taxonomy registry test-double compatible and aligning the capture capability guard test with current unsupported-scope behavior
- add the Spec 205 planning artifacts and mark the implementation tasks complete

## Verification
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent`
- `cd apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests --stop-on-failure`
  - result: `3659 passed, 8 skipped (21016 assertions)`
- browser smoke test passed on the Baseline Compare landing surface via the local smoke-login flow

## Notes
- no Filament resource, panel, global search, destructive action, or asset registration behavior was changed
- provider registration remains unchanged in `apps/platform/bootstrap/providers.php`
- the compare path remains strategy-driven and Livewire v4 / Filament v5 assumptions are unchanged

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #235
2026-04-14 21:54:37 +00:00

1.3 KiB

Specification Quality Checklist: Compare Job Legacy Drift Path Cleanup

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-04-14
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

Notes

  • Validation passed on 2026-04-14 after the initial drafting pass.
  • The feature is an internal cleanup, so user value is expressed through architectural honesty, review speed, and regression safety rather than a new operator-facing workflow.