ahmido
3a2a06e8d7
## Summary - align tenant dashboard KPI, attention, compare, and operations truth so the page does not read calmer than the tenant's actual state - preserve tenant-safe drill-through continuity into findings, baseline compare, and canonical operations, including disabled helper states for permission-limited members - add the Spec 173 artifact set and focused regression coverage for dashboard truth alignment and drill-through behavior ## Validation - `vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent` - `vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact tests/Feature/Filament/DashboardKpisWidgetTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/TenantDashboardTruthAlignmentTest.php tests/Feature/Monitoring/OperationsDashboardDrillthroughTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/NeedsAttentionWidgetTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareNowWidgetTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/BaselineCompareSummaryConsistencyTest.php tests/Feature/Findings/FindingsListDefaultsTest.php tests/Feature/Findings/FindingsListFiltersTest.php tests/Feature/Findings/FindingAdminTenantParityTest.php tests/Feature/OpsUx/CanonicalViewRunLinksTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/TenantDashboardTenantScopeTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/TenantDashboardDbOnlyTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/TableStandardsBaselineTest.php tests/Feature/Filament/TableDetailVisibilityTest.php` - integrated browser smoke on the tenant dashboard, including a permission-limited member scenario Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de> Reviewed-on: #204
36 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
36 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
# Specification Quality Checklist: Tenant Dashboard KPI & Attention Truth Alignment
|
|
|
|
**Purpose**: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
|
|
**Created**: 2026-04-03
|
|
**Feature**: [spec.md](../spec.md)
|
|
|
|
## Content Quality
|
|
|
|
- [x] No implementation details (languages, frameworks, APIs)
|
|
- [x] Focused on user value and business needs
|
|
- [x] Written for non-technical stakeholders
|
|
- [x] All mandatory sections completed
|
|
|
|
## Requirement Completeness
|
|
|
|
- [x] No [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers remain
|
|
- [x] Requirements are testable and unambiguous
|
|
- [x] Success criteria are measurable
|
|
- [x] Success criteria are technology-agnostic (no implementation details)
|
|
- [x] All acceptance scenarios are defined
|
|
- [x] Edge cases are identified
|
|
- [x] Scope is clearly bounded
|
|
- [x] Dependencies and assumptions identified
|
|
|
|
## Feature Readiness
|
|
|
|
- [x] All functional requirements have clear acceptance criteria
|
|
- [x] User scenarios cover primary flows
|
|
- [x] Feature meets measurable outcomes defined in Success Criteria
|
|
- [x] No implementation details leak into specification
|
|
|
|
## Notes
|
|
|
|
- Validation pass 1: complete.
|
|
- The spec stays bounded to the existing tenant dashboard surface family and explicitly rejects a new global tenant-posture component or persisted dashboard aggregate.
|
|
- The main validation focus was keeping tenant-level KPI, attention, compare, and recent surfaces aligned around the same tenant truth while preserving clear separation between posture, activity, and recency. |