ahmido/TenantAtlas
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects 1 Releases Wiki Activity
20b6aa6a32
TenantAtlas/specs/163-baseline-subject-resolution/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido c17255f854 feat: implement baseline subject resolution semantics (#193) 
## Summary
- add the structured subject-resolution foundation for baseline compare and baseline capture, including capability guards, subject descriptors, resolution outcomes, and operator action categories
- persist structured evidence-gap subject records and update compare/capture surfaces, landing projections, and cleanup tooling to use the new contract
- add Spec 163 artifacts and focused Pest coverage for classification, determinism, cleanup, and DB-only rendering

## Validation
- `vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent`
- `vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Unit/Support/Baselines tests/Feature/Baselines tests/Feature/Filament/OperationRunEnterpriseDetailPageTest.php`

## Notes
- verified locally that a fresh post-restart baseline compare run now writes structured `baseline_compare.evidence_gaps.subjects` records instead of the legacy broad payload shape
- excluded the separate `docs/product/spec-candidates.md` worktree change from this branch commit and PR

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #193
2026-03-25 12:40:45 +00:00

1.4 KiB
Raw Blame History

Specification Quality Checklist: Baseline Subject Resolution and Evidence Gap Semantics Foundation

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-03-24
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 on first pass.
  • The spec intentionally establishes root-cause and runtime-support semantics only; fidelity richness, renderer density, and wording refinement remain deferred follow-on work.