ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
website-dev
TenantAtlas/specs/408-review-evidence-decision/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido acdea41d92 408: add review pack story surfaces and homepage polish (#405) 
## Summary
- add the localized review-pack product story routes at `/platform/review-packs` and `/en/platform/review-packs` with shared page composition, evidence/decision framing, audience sections, trust handoff, and footer/use-case/home/platform discovery
- extend `site-copy`, smoke coverage, and Spec Kit artifacts for feature 408 so the public website contract, tests, research, plan, quickstart, and checklist stay aligned
- polish the public presentation with a cleaner review-pack comparison surface, a more opaque navbar to remove homepage logo bleed-through, a higher-contrast secondary CTA, unique homepage feature icons, and less repetitive homepage use-case copy

## Validation
- `corepack pnpm --filter @tenantatlas/website build`
- `corepack pnpm --filter @tenantatlas/website test tests/smoke/public-routes.spec.ts`
- `corepack pnpm --filter @tenantatlas/website test tests/smoke/interaction.spec.ts`
- source/dist claim scans plus manual browser comprehension checks are recorded in `specs/408-review-evidence-decision/checklists/requirements.md`
- current touched website files are free of editor diagnostics; live browser console check on the homepage returned no errors

## Notes
- trust/proof messaging remains intentionally honest; this PR does not add fabricated customer logos, certifications, or unsupported compliance claims
- `origin/website-dev` is the review base for this PR

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #405
2026-05-29 13:48:21 +00:00

2.0 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Customer-safe Review, Evidence & Decision Story

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-05-28
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

  • Initial validation passed with no remaining clarification markers.
  • The spec stays bounded to the public website and keeps apps/platform explicitly out of scope.
  • Route selection remains intentionally flexible inside current IA, with /platform/review-packs recorded as the preferred destination.
  • The spec is ready for /speckit.plan.
  • Implementation completed inside apps/website/** plus feature-spec artifacts only; git diff --name-only -- apps/platform returned no paths.
  • Validation completed with build, full public-routes + interaction smoke suites, source/dist claim scans, and manual browser comprehension checks for both localized review-pack routes.
  • Source and dist claim scans returned no matches after the final copy cleanup.
  • Repo-wide corepack pnpm --filter @tenantatlas/website format:check still reports nine pre-existing, untouched formatting issues outside this feature slice; touched files pass prettier --check.