ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
1142d283eb
TenantAtlas/specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido 1142d283eb feat: Spec 178 — Operations Lifecycle Alignment & Cross-Surface Truth Consistency (#209) 
## Spec 178 — Operations Lifecycle Alignment & Cross-Surface Truth Consistency

Härtet die Run-Lifecycle-Wahrheit und Cross-Surface-Konsistenz über alle zentralen Operator-Flächen hinweg.

### Kern-Änderungen

**Lifecycle Truth Alignment**
- Einheitliche stale/stuck-Semantik zwischen Tenant-, Workspace-, Admin- und System-Surfaces
- `OperationRunFreshnessState` wird konsistent über alle Widgets und Seiten propagiert
- Gemeinsame Problem-Klassen-Trennung: `terminal_follow_up` vs. `active_stale_attention`

**BulkOperationProgress Freshness**
- Overlay zeigt nur noch `healthyActive()` Runs statt alle aktiven Runs
- Likely-stale Runs halten das Polling nicht mehr künstlich aktiv
- Terminal Runs verschwinden zeitnah aus dem Progress-Overlay

**Decision Zone im Run Detail**
- Stale/reconciled Attention in der primären Decision-Hierarchie
- Klare Antworten: aktiv? stale? reconciled? nächster Schritt?
- Artifact-reiche Runs behalten Lifecycle-Truth vor Deep-Diagnostics

**Cross-Surface Link-Continuity**
- Dashboard → Operations Hub → Run Detail erzählen dieselbe Geschichte
- Notifications referenzieren korrekte Problem-Klasse
- Workspace/Tenant-Attention verlinken problemklassengerecht

**System-Plane Fixes**
- `/system/ops/failures` 500-Error behoben (panel-sichere Artifact-URLs)
- System-Stuck/Failures zeigen reconciled stale lineage

### Weitere Fixes
- Inventory auth guard bereinigt (Gate statt ad-hoc Facades)
- Browser-Smoke-Tests stabilisiert (DOM-Assertions statt fragile Klicks)
- Test-Assertion-Drift für Verification/Lifecycle-Texte korrigiert

### Test-Ergebnis
Full Suite: **3269 passed**, 8 skipped, 0 failed

### Spec-Artefakte
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/spec.md`
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/plan.md`
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/tasks.md`
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/research.md`
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/data-model.md`
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/quickstart.md`
- `specs/178-ops-truth-alignment/contracts/operations-truth-alignment.openapi.yaml`

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #209
2026-04-05 22:42:24 +00:00

1.6 KiB
Raw Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Operations Lifecycle Alignment & Cross-Surface Truth Consistency

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-04-05
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

  • Validated after the initial draft. The spec stays focused on operator trust, cross-surface truth alignment, and drill-through continuity while explicitly avoiding new persistence or a lifecycle-model rewrite.
  • The only new semantic split is a derived operator-facing distinction between terminal follow-up and active stale or stuck attention, built from existing lifecycle truth rather than new stored state.
  • No clarification markers remain. Scope, non-goals, dependencies, and measurable outcomes are explicit enough to proceed to planning.