TenantAtlas/specs/184-dashboard-recovery-honesty/checklists/requirements.md
ahmido f1a73490e4 feat: finalize dashboard recovery honesty (#215)
## Summary
- add a dedicated Recovery Readiness dashboard widget for backup posture and recovery evidence
- group Needs Attention items by domain and elevate the recovery call-to-action
- align restore-run and recovery posture tests with the extracted widget and continuity flows
- include the related spec artifacts for 184-dashboard-recovery-honesty

## Verification
- `cd /Users/ahmeddarrazi/Documents/projects/TenantAtlas/apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail bin pint --dirty --format agent`
- `cd /Users/ahmeddarrazi/Documents/projects/TenantAtlas/apps/platform && ./vendor/bin/sail artisan test --compact --filter="DashboardKpisWidget|DashboardRecoveryPosture|TenantDashboardDbOnly|TenantpilotSeedBackupHealthBrowserFixtureCommand|NeedsAttentionWidget"`
- browser smoke verified on the calm, unvalidated, and weakened dashboard states

## Notes
- Livewire v4.0+ compliant with Filament v5
- no panel provider changes; Laravel 11+ provider registration remains in `bootstrap/providers.php`
- Recovery Readiness stays within the existing tenant dashboard asset strategy; no new Filament asset registration required

Co-authored-by: Ahmed Darrazi <ahmed.darrazi@live.de>
Reviewed-on: #215
2026-04-08 23:21:36 +00:00

1.3 KiB

Specification Quality Checklist: Dashboard Recovery Posture Honesty

Purpose: Validate specification completeness and quality before proceeding to planning
Created: 2026-04-08
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 2026-04-08. The spec keeps behavior focused on dashboard honesty, restore-history evidence, and operator trust boundaries. Repository-specific route and surface references are retained only where this template and constitution require concrete scope identification.