ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
website-dev
TenantAtlas/specs/404-public-content-messaging/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido c261b1c632 feat(website): tighten homepage messaging and trust flow (#398) 
## Summary
- tighten homepage messaging, hero support copy, trust teaser flow, and CTA routing for the website public-content rollout
- align shared website copy, smoke expectations, and spec 404 artifacts with the latest messaging pass
- replace the previously closed PR for `404-public-content-messaging`

## Commits
- `44d27395` feat(website): tighten homepage messaging and trust flow
- `1ddbd28b` feat(website): refine public content messaging rollout

## Validation
- `git diff --check`

## Notes
- local Playwright MCP output remains untracked and was not included

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #398
2026-05-25 20:35:33 +00:00

1.6 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Public Website Positioning & Content Architecture

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning

Created: 2026-05-25

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 pass 1 completed on 2026-05-25.
  • No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain; the supplied positioning, provider posture, and trust boundaries were specific enough to avoid open questions.
  • Repository/workspace contract references and validation commands are intentional delivery guards, not framework-selection leakage.
  • Existing downstream planning artifacts under specs/404-public-content-messaging/ predate this refreshed spec and should be reconciled before implementation continues.