ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
02e75e1cda
TenantAtlas/specs/165-baseline-summary-trust/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido 02e75e1cda feat: harden baseline compare summary trust surfaces (#196) 
## Summary
- add a shared baseline compare summary assessment and assessor for compact trust propagation
- harden dashboard, landing, and banner baseline compare surfaces against false all-clear claims
- add focused Pest coverage for dashboard, landing, banner, reason translation, and canonical detail parity

## Validation
- vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent
- vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Feature/Baselines/BaselineCompareSummaryAssessmentTest.php tests/Feature/Baselines/BaselineCompareExplanationFallbackTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareNowWidgetTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/NeedsAttentionWidgetTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareExplanationSurfaceTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareLandingWhyNoFindingsTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareCoverageBannerTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareSummaryConsistencyTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/OperationRunBaselineTruthSurfaceTest.php tests/Feature/ReasonTranslation/ReasonTranslationExplanationTest.php

## Notes
- Livewire compliance: Filament v5 / Livewire v4 stack unchanged
- Provider registration: unchanged, Laravel 12 providers remain in bootstrap/providers.php
- Global search: no searchable resource behavior changed
- Destructive actions: none introduced by this change
- Assets: no new assets registered; existing deploy process remains unchanged

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #196
2026-03-27 00:19:53 +00:00

1.4 KiB
Raw Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Baseline Compare Summary Trust Propagation & Compliance Claim Hardening

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-03-26
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 completed in one pass.
  • No clarification markers were needed; the supplied feature description was specific enough to define scope, risks, and measurable outcomes.
  • The spec stays focused on summary-truth propagation and explicitly excludes backend compare-engine or persistence redesign.